Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Return-on-Investment Studies: Using Production Data in Technical Services

223 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Presented at “Statistics and Reports: Data-Driven Decision-Making”, ALCTS Preconference, June 2014

Veröffentlicht in: Daten & Analysen
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Return-on-Investment Studies: Using Production Data in Technical Services

  1. 1. Beth Picknally Camden University of Pennsylvania Libraries bethpc@upenn.edu June 2014
  2. 2.  Business definition  Library approach  My approach ◦ Cost ◦ Value
  3. 3.  Fast-track replacements  Serials check-in  Returns
  4. 4.  Fast-track replacement is a process where we purchase replacements for missing books before they are fully searched & declared lost.  Reason for study: ◦ time pressure; “niche” workflow ◦ Staff reporting that many books were “found” by the time replacement arrived ◦ Growth of BD/EZB seen as replacing the need
  5. 5.  Costs  Sample of 75 replacements over 3 FYs  Circulation data  Discussions with bibliographers
  6. 6. Total spent Number purchased Average cost FY08 $19,394.33 427 $45.42 FY09 $23,953.85 478 $50.11 FY10 $27,074.64 507 $53.40 Total 08-10 $70,422.82 1,412 $49.87
  7. 7. Sample size Still lost? % Aver circ orig copy Aver circ repl copy Aver circ BD/EZB FY08 25 14 56.0% 5.12 2.64 0.68 FY09 25 12 48.0% 3.64 0.96 2.4 FY10 25 13 52.0% 3.04 1.44 0.16 Overall 75 40 53.3% 3.93 1.68 1.08
  8. 8.  Couldn’t get report with all the factors that I wanted to consider  So used sample for a deep dive ◦ Voyager searching ◦ BD/EZB reports
  9. 9.  Nearly half of the sampled titles (46.7%) were no longer missing  Replacement copies circulated fewer times than originals  11 of the 75 titles (14.6%) had no charges for either the original or replacement copies  58 of the 75 titles were never borrowed BD/EZB  Bibliographers valued fast-track
  10. 10.  Continue Fast-track  Change in timing (now biweekly)  Considering another review
  11. 11.  Is periodical check-in worth the cost (staff time, etc.)?
  12. 12.  Cost  Staff interviews  Patron point-of-use survey  Tracking patron questions
  13. 13. Total salaries $ 77,216.00 current periodicals (est.) 5500 Annual cost per title $ 14.04 FY11 collection spending Monograph: $ 3,686,338.19 24.82% Serial: $ 1,507,453.46 10.15% Electronic: $ 9,031,362.90 60.80% General funds: $ 629,180.47 4.24%
  14. 14.  2 minute paper survey  The survey results indicated: ◦ Users found issues they needed on the shelves (71%) ◦ Users consulted catalog first (64%) ◦ If not found: they equally either ask for help, request an ILL, or use the online version
  15. 15.  Two week period tracked patron questions relating to current periodicals at various locations  Total (in-person; phone; IM/Chat): 1,011  Questions relating to current periodicals: 38 (3.75%)
  16. 16.  Value of check-in ◦ Collection integrity ◦ Fiscal responsibility ◦ Competence and service quality ◦ Vendor reliability and accountability  Also gathered info about current WF problems
  17. 17.  Voyager does not provide any data to track staff productivity; time spent on check-in; who did the check-in; etc.  Web analytics could not be gathered to track patron use of current issue information
  18. 18.  Report recommended continuing check-in ◦ Deciding factor: fiscal responsibility  Appendix documented a variety of workflow and timeliness problems. Many have been addressed.
  19. 19. This study looked at activity of returning books to vendors, for both approval plans and firm orders, and included a review of related activities including bibliographer review of approval books.
  20. 20.  Departmental annual reports  Voyager reports  YBP GOBI reports
  21. 21. Cost of returns annual cost cost per item Staff time to process returns $ 14,528.80 $ 23.97 Return Postage $ 2,500.00 $ 4.13 Total $ 17,028.80 $ 28.10
  22. 22.  30+ approval plans  3 years of data: ◦ Number received (up slightly over 3 years) ◦ Number returned (declining over 3 years) ◦ Calculated % returned for each vendor  Overall return rate declining 4%2%
  23. 23. 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 All Approval Returns 1956 1877 1312 993 693 606 YBP Returns n/a n/a n/a 576 461 388
  24. 24. Approval Return Reasons damaged/defective 40 2% duplicate 564 29% no to series 13 1% poor quality 21 1% reprint 12 1% scope 656 34% textbook 3 0% too expensive 56 3% vendor error 1 0% wrong format 2 0% no reason 563 29%
  25. 25. LC Class Shipped Returned % Ret'd A 12 0 0% B 1828 21 1% C 84 0 0% D 1299 6 0% E 637 1 0% F 374 1 0% G 449 28 6% H 2937 36 1% J 970 5 1% K 460 54 12% L 551 5 1% LC Class Shipped Returned % Ret'd M 335 0 0% N 664 11 2% P 3839 12 0% Q 460 76 17% R 184 14 8% S 55 2 4% T 357 55 15% U 183 27 15% V 35 5 14% Z 47 1 2% Total 15760 360 2%
  26. 26.  Eliminated plan with high rate of return  Shared data with Coll Dev for updating profiles  Not returning books costing $25 or less  Used data (reduction in returns) to justify changing staff duties to union
  27. 27.  Time consuming  Not all data available  Unexpected findings about related WF  Assumptions may/may not be proven  Other factors beyond data can influence decisions  Determining the VALUE of a service is more difficult than determining the COST
  28. 28. Driving With Data: A Roadmap for Evidence-Based Decision Making in Academic Libraries – Marcum & Schonfeld

×