This session was held on April 21st and allowed participants to share and ask one another about their OCLC holdings updating and workflow.

1. Spring Webinar:
OCLC updating – a sharing
session
FEATURING…..YOU!
HAVE A QUESTION YOU WANT TO ASK DURING THE SESSION?
FEEL FREE TO CHAT IT IN ANYTIME!

2. Does someone have a workflow for day-
to-day adding holdings that they really
like?
Eastern Shores: originally had a single symbol for all libraries. Then they moved to multiple
symbols and this has caused problems. Add 4 files:
1. Deletes: export from ILS (Polaris), identified by library code, by date range: sending OCLC
number and location code and code of 0/1 to determine if holding is active/deleted
2. New adds: exporting from ILS, identified by library code, by date range
3. Re-adding delete file as adds: It ignores some of them, so generates a lot of errors that have
to be kicked out.
4. Everything she’s added centrally
Can’t do anything one-by-one because it all is dealt with centrally.
Exports take 15-20 minutes total; Processing takes longer; dealing with error files can take 1-2
hours every two weeks (worse case). Alison is willing to write down and share!

3. Does someone have a workflow for day-
to-day adding holdings that they really
like?
Indianhead: have one symbol for everyone except Eau Claire, who is doing own cataloging on
OCLC.
5-6 librarians are cataloging; everyone else is attaching their items to the database, and they go
to Z39.50 if there is not a record. Records are coded when they come into the ILS database.
They go into OCLC, search record number and hit “update”. Wondering if there is a better way
to export and update through batch.
They also do overlays in the ILS and go in and update manually.
Deletes: Libraries notify if they have deleted last item and then the central office go in and
update manually.
{UW Colleges has a similar workflow but 13 symbols}

4. How do you deal with large quantities of
deletes or updates (collection changes,
etc.)?
Eastern Shores: batch process no matter what
Indianhead: manual update process
SCLS: batch deletes
UW-Colleges: batch deletes

5. Are you using batch processing?
What are the pros and cons?
Eastern Shores:
Con: As single office, trying to do it with 14 different symbols. Not being able to distinguish
what they have deleted (last or not last).
Pro: No way they could manage OCLC holdings without them.
Madison:
SCLS does them for them. It seems to be straightforward
Con: haven’t done a global comparison with holdings. They can’t do a total extraction from the
current ILS, so not completely up-to-date – makes it difficult for ILL outside of the ILS. Change
individually. Interested in finding other options for global update

6. Global updates
OCLC matches ILS file to OCLC holdings and then lets you know when things don’t match so you
can update them (on OCLC or ILS)
Madison: In 2011, had to change a lot of workflows. Before then, they could compare OCLC
numbers between the ILS and the holdings in OCLC database. Because of record merges, etc.,
not sure it is up to date. They can do batches but not the whole thing at once.
Eastern Shores: Reclamation project: updates/deletes weren’t working, and merging had
caused issues with holdings being on the wrong record. They exported entire database and tried
to re-match things.

7. When you do updates (batch or otherwise), what
checks do you run to make sure everything was
updated as it should be?
Eastern Shores: don’t run anything. Just cross fingers  (Running 1000 of records a week).
Export and new adds include early on order records. Those holdings may be on a “baby
acquisitions” record through the batch process. She tracks those records and manually moves
those around. On her end, those are coded as incomplete and then she deals with them and
adjusts OCLC holdings as needed.
Question for OCLC: sometimes it’s hard to understand why they choose the records they do.
Madison Public: similar process: they are cataloging things pre-publication, so they sometimes
don’t attach until more information is available. Sometimes, double check and move the
holding. Also have local matching and grouping rules that aren’t as granular: lot of judgement
and discernment. Adds are all individual; only batch deletes. MPL can spot-check, and we get
feedback from SCLS member libraries about problems & can fix them individually
UW Colleges: We look at the Batch report from OCLC (or whatever it is called). Mainly see that
there were no holdings on a particular record (for deletes)

8. What other questions do you have
for each other about updating
holdings?
Is anyone else using WorldShare or have experience with it?
Indianhead: No
Eastern Shores: No
UW-Colleges: No
Is anybody doing batch program for LH records?
Indianhead: No
Eastern Shores: No: didn’t apply to how things worked there
Madison PL: No

9. What other questions do you have
for each other about updating
holdings?
How much upgrading to records are you doing?
Madison: Level 3 records are problematic. They are upgrading some records as it makes sense. The self-
publishing boom is providing them with more original records to deal with.
Eastern Shores: Don’t see much of the actual material, so she can’t do as much updating of records. If a record is
still a low level after a period of time, she’ll do original cataloging or updating. More tweaking in local database
instead.
Indianhead: Do very little, mostly because they are “inexperienced and afraid”. Kathy has added a few new
original records for local authors. Does go in and do simple edits. Summary statements: when she is working
with a record, she will add one. She has been adding more subject headings as appropriate.
UW-Colleges: UW Colleges don't see a lot of level 3 records. We do enhance records when appropriate.
Beloit: We wait for awhile to see if there is a better record, but if not, we do an original record and leave the Level
3. I find the Level 3 records very irritating. I will update some records that seem to have left out some "basic"
subject headings.

10. What other questions do you have
for each other about updating
holdings?
Encouraging to add your own!
Madison: Whatever you are doing is better than Level 3. Make them K records.
Many use Amazon and publisher records for clarification
In WorldShare, there is a setting you can get if something is upgraded TO a better level, not
FROM a worse level. If there was a way to see if Level 3 records were upgraded, that would be
great. Reports they get are buggy and don’t match settings. Hope this is kinks that are worked
out.
Eastern Shores: They were getting more than they thought they should have, or adding for a
small change that wasn’t what she expected: may still be ironing out kinks.

11. What other questions do you have
for each other about updating
holdings?
RDA
Eastern Shores switched at the end of last year. She is getting more comfortable. She is
upgrading Level 3s. Like the “writing what you see” of it. Learning as she goes. RDA changes
are merging in with AACR records, so they are sort of “mish mashed” right now.
UW-Colleges: RDA for original cataloging
Indianhead: Using RDA: haven’t made it official yet, but they are doing majority of it and
working toward official switch this summer.
Madison: Accept and edit RDA, but not cataloging originally in RDA yet. Some of the ILS displays
don’t work well with the standard yet, so no firm date of when they are switching.

12. What feedback would you like to give
OCLC about updating
holdings/records?
•Level 3 records are a problem.
•Indianhead: often end up creating one locally instead of using them.
•In WorldShare, there is a setting you can get if something is upgraded TO a better level, not
FROM a worse level. If there was a way to see if Level 3 records were upgraded, that would be
great. Reports they get are buggy and don’t match settings. Hope this is kinks that are worked
out.
•Would be great to have multiple update profiles per institution in WorldShare. Right now, can
only have one set of update rules for the holding symbol, which is problem for multiple formats.