Purchase on Demand(POD) & Interlibrary Loan
Download
Report
Transcript Purchase on Demand(POD) & Interlibrary Loan
PURCHASE ON
D EMAND( POD)
& I NTERLIBRARY L OAN
W HAT
DOES
POD
MEAN ?
Patron-centered/driven acquisition, just-in-time acquisition,
patron-initiated purchasing (PIP) or evidence based selection
Workflow and policies differ among libraries, but initial
request comes through ILL
Little or no subject specialist/selector input or intervention
Some institutions authorize ILL units (rather than
acquisitions) to make the purchase request
Item may be given to the user when it arrives and cataloged
after it is returned to further expedite fulfillment
Supplement to traditional (just-in-case) collection
development methods
POD P OLICIES
Set budget for program
Determine workflow for ILL and Acquisitions
Selection criteria:
*date of material
*language
*vendors
*publishers (UP vs. vanity press)
*type of material (recreational or textbooks)
Metrics:
*circulation stats
Gail Herrera & Judy Greenwood (2011) “Patron-Initiated Purchasing: Evaluating Criteria and Workflows” Journal of Interlibrary
Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 21:1-2, 9-24.
B UYING
VS .
B ORROWING
Interlibrary loan is not intended as a substitute for
collection development.
New titles should not be requested through ILL whenever
possible
POD can save time of user and of library staff
It may be cheaper to purchase and catalog if material
cannot be borrowed from a reciprocal borrowing institution
and/or the lender requires return by expedited shipper
Much of the literature points to circulation stats that show
POD materials circulate more than once
B UYING
VS .
B ORROWING
Kent Allen (1979) Use of Library Materials: The
University of Pittsburg Study New York: Marcel
Dekker
Approximately 40% of new titles had not
circulated 5 years after purchase
Richard L. Trueswell (1969) “Library Users: The
80/20 Rule” Wilson Library Bulletin 43/5, 458461
80% of use from 20% of collection
B UYING
VS .
B ORROWING
Buy when book is published in the current/previous year
Filling requests in the most timely manner possible is of the
upmost importance to our users
Patron does not care how the material is obtained
POD program should be seamless and not require additional
work for end user
According to the literature, many interdisciplinary titles are
added to the collection through POD programs that are not
normally obtained through traditional collection
development policies
B UYING
VS .
B ORROWING
The goal of the Washington and Lee
University Library’s POD program is to
meet the immediate needs of our users
while adding potential
high-use titles to our collection
Collaboration between Public Services
(ILL Unit) and Technical Services
T HE W&L POD PROGRAM
CRITERIA :
current year imprint
price of item less than $100 (prior to shipping)
not already expected through our Approval Plan
ILL materials that are requested more than once (by
same user or multiple users) or needed for an
extended period of time
Very few or no holdings on a title in WorldCat
H OW
IT WORKS
@ W&L
ILL request submitted by user through ILLiad
ILL staff determines if request meets POD criteria
Request is routed from ILL to Acquisitions using
email templates and routing rules set-up in ILLiad
Item is purchased, cataloged, and user is notified
when item is available for check-out
W HY I T W ORKS
Items may be purchased and next day delivery requested from vendor
Items are “rush” cataloged
It is possible for users to have item(s) in hand in shorter amount of time than
average ILL transaction (for W&L, average ILL transaction is about 4-5 business
days)
It does not guarantee use by one user (they may not come to pick-up the
item)
In our experience, POD materials do get checked-out at least once and several
have had multiple check-outs
User will have longer loan period than with ILL and can easily renew
Item will be available for future check-outs
Works well for DVDs (cheap to purchase and difficult to borrow through ILL)
PATRON F EEDBACK
Some of the literature discusses obtaining
patron feedback through surveys
Suggestions for improvements, level of
satisfactions, expectations/needs, etc.
Uta Hussong-Christian & Kerri Goergen-Doll (2010) “We're Listening: Using
Patron Feedback to Assess and Enhance Purchase on Demand” Journal of
Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 20:5, 319-335.
C RITICISM
POD purchases may be made without patron
consultation and patron only needs book for citation
checking or bibliography chasing
Collection may end up with materials that have narrow
focus
It is cost effective? Cost-per-use? ROI?
See G. Van Dyk (2011) “Interlibrary loan purchase-ondemand: A misleading literature” Library Collections,
Acquisitions, and Technical Services Volume 35: 2-3,
83-89
GIST: G ETTING IT S YSTEM
TOOLKIT
D EVELOPE D
BY
M ILNE L IBRARY
AT
SU N Y G ENESEO
idsproject.org/tools/gist.aspx
Tool for integrating Acquisitions and ILL into one workflow
and interface
From GIST website
using ILLiad/GIST users and staff can easily determine:
*uniqueness (for cooperative collection development)
*locate free online sources (to reduce cost and/or
catalog eBooks just-in-time)
*see reviews and rankings (to add value to the request
process)
*see purchasing options and prices
GIST
B IBLIOGRAPHY
Nancy Lichten Alder (2007) “Direct Purchase As a Function of Interlibrary Loan: Buying Books Versus Borrowing” Journal of
Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 18:1, 9-15.
Megan Gaffney (2011) “Item Shipped! Purchase on Demand and ILLiad 8 Addons” 2011 ILLiad International Conference
Gail Herrera & Judy Greenwood (2011) “Patron-Initiated Purchasing: Evaluating Criteria and Workflows” Journal of Interlibrary
Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 21:1-2, 9-24.
Uta Hussong-Christian & Kerri Goergen-Doll (2010) “We're Listening: Using Patron Feedback to Assess and Enhance Purchase on
Demand” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 20:5, 319-335.
Peter Spitzform (2011) The User Knows Best www.nelib.org/Resources/Documents/NETSL/SpitzformPDAnetsl2011.pdf
David C. Tyler, Joyce C. Melvin, Yang Xu, Marylou Epp & Anita M. Kreps (2011) “Effective Selectors? Interlibrary Loan Patrons as
Monograph Purchasers: A Comparative Examination of Price and Circulation-Related Performance” Journal of
Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 21:1-2, 57-90
David C. Tyler (2011) “Patron-Driven Purchase on Demand Programs for Printed Books and Similar Materials” Library Philosophy
and Practice http://unllib.unl.edu/LPP/tyler.htm
G. Van Dyk (2011) “Interlibrary loan purchase-on-demand: A misleading literature” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical
Services Volume 35: 2-3, 83-89
David Zopfi-Jordan (2008) “Purchasing or Borrowing: Making Interlibrary Loan Decisions That Enhance Patron Satisfaction”
Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 18:3, 387-394.