Best Practices for Demand-Driven Acquisition of Monographs:

Preliminary Recommendations of the NISO DDA Working Group

Charleston ConferenceNovember 8, 2013

Barbara Kawecki, YBP Library ServicesMichael Levine-Clark, University of Denver Libraries

Best Practices for Demand-Driven Acquisition of Monographs:

Preliminary Recommendations of the NISO DDA Working Group

Charleston ConferenceNovember 8, 2013

Barbara Kawecki, YBP Library ServicesMichael Levine-Clark, University of Denver Libraries

SURVEY RESULTS AND VERY

Goals

• Develop a flexible model for DDA that works for publishers, vendors, aggregators, and libraries.

• Model should allow for DDA programs that– Meet local budget and collection needs – Allow for consortial participation– Support cross-aggregator implementation– Account for how DDA impacts all functional areas of

the library

http://www.flickr.com/photos/katiedee/3644929496/

Deliverables• Recommendations for– Managing and populating the consideration pool– Developing consistent models for • Free discovery• Temporary lease• Purchase

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dee_/3239025112/

Deliverables• Recommendations for– Methods for managing multiple formats (p&e)– Ways to incorporate print-on-demand (POD)– Development of tools and strategies to measure

use– Implementation at the local and consortial levels– Providing long-term access to unowned e-book

content

Three Subcommittees

• Access Models– Chair, Lisa Mackinder, UC Irvine

• Technical Issues– Chair, Lisa Nachtigall, Wiley

• Metrics– Chair, Lorraine Keelan, Palgrave

http://www.flickr.com/photos/korephotos/6349696845/

SURVEY RESULTS

Main survey conducted August 2013

• 104 questions

• 181 responses

• 99 complete responses

http://www.flickr.com/photos/info_grrl/5547707940/

• Majority say programs effective, goals met• Primary benefits:– Immediate access for patrons– Frees up selectors to focus on

advanced/specialized collection development– Much larger ebook collections, relatively low cost– Increased ebook usage overall

• Challenges:– DRM– Limited content available– Poor tools to manage programs

• 17 responses• Limited budget• Limited staff• Size of institution

• Imbalanced collection• Not collection development• Unsuitable content• Will purchase titles that won’t get used again• Little or no ownership• Not all books/publishers are available• Malicious purchasing• Purchasing by unaffiliated users• Duplication (e/p or e/e)

112 responses

• Evidence based– Commit more $ than ultimately used– Time consuming

• Budget overrun (though many indicate hasn’t been an issue)

• Pay more with STL• DRM, long-term access concerns• General ebook concerns• Workflow concerns• Lack of user awareness• Risks for publishers

• DDA from multiple aggregators, with different triggers – potentially confusing

• Triggers for download, printing, but may not be “real” use

• Time limit could be hit when user leaves ebook open• Five minutes not long enough• TOC, front matter generally aren’t enough to determine

value

• Expand collection • Complements traditional coll dev and ILL• Ability to experiment with new subject areas• Studies show higher subsequent use than

traditional materials• Collection development based on actual data• “A nice resolution to the just-in-case vs. just-in-

time paradigms”• Can be used to analyze gaps/needs/trends

112 responses

• Guaranteed use• Meets patron needs• No delays in access, unmediated• Some like mediated aspect of evidence-based

models• Very cost effective, helps budget• Way to justify budgets• STL – cost savings, “may be all that is needed”• Frees up staff time

• Free browse is essential• Free browse can be used to determine if print

copy is desired• STL and free browse are cost effective• TOC and index can be used effectively to

determine what is not wanted

• Better tracking/reporting– Owned vs unowned– To allow us to build models based on patterns

• Larger pool of content (more books, more publishers)

• DRM, simultaneous user models, device compatibility

• Better workflow options (record loads, etc.)

91 responses

• Pricing– Tiered by institution size– Standard STL cost– STLs count toward purchase cost

• Remove login requirements• Longer browse• Better profiling (more granular)• Simplify – too many options is confusing

• Additional content types– Streaming video– Articles, chapters, pages– Reference works– Textbooks

• Pricing– STL cost applied to purchase cost– Free STLs

61 responses

• Make it easier to remove titles• Make it easier for Acquisitions to bypass system to order

titles that are needed• Better MARC records• Easier and continuous deduplication process• Better usage data

– Make it possible for all aspects of DDA to be data-driven• ILL rights• Use aggregator for process, but allow content to live on

publisher platform• More nuanced notification options (e.g. librarian notified

of first STL on very expensive books)

• Longer free browse• Copying/pasting shouldn’t be a trigger• Need more flexibility– Different libraries have different goals

• Customizable triggers by subject• STLS set too high/STLS set too low• Need better reporting on what triggers caused a

financial transaction for a title

51 responses

• DDA profiles often broader• Fewer qualifiers in DDA than approval profile • Price, publisher, subject

• Most with multiple profiles have them with one vendor

• Majority: As needed– Only because content no longer available from

aggregator• Monthly (9)• Weekly (4)• Quarterly (3)• Biweekly (2)• Annually (2)• Every three years (1)

• No longer available from aggregator• Not in desired publication date range• If print purchased• In pool for a year or more with no trigger

PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS

FLEXIBILITY

Access Models

• Controls for intentional use– Free browse– Front/back matter– Time in the book

• Respond to levels of comfort with access vs. ownership– Adjustable STL levels– Purchase or not

• Models that allow for implementation when infrastructure unavailable (eg. Evidence Based)

Technical Issues

• Implementation of a profile that can be managed relative to budget

• Record management– Deletions– Deduplication

• May be more important to have high-quality discovery records than high-quality ownership records

Metrics

• Ability to measure all types of use– Pre and post-purchase– Non-use– STL, browse, purchase

• Ability to use data to – Predict spending patterns– Adjust profile– Adjust triggers

Timeline• Appointment of working group• Information gathering– Main survey completed– Interviews– Additional surveys

• Public libraries• consortia

– Information gathering completed

• Completion of initial draft• Gathering of public comments• Completion of final report

Aug 2012

Aug 2013

Nov 2013

Feb 2014Mar 2014May 2014

Thank You

Barbara Kaweckibkawecki@ybp.com

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