Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byClemence Miller Modified over 8 years ago
1
PDA fulfilling ILL (or the other way around) at the University of Huddersfield Chris Beevers Customer Services Librarian Interlend 2016
2
What I’m gonna tell you: I’ll describe our pilot to use PDA to fulfill ILL Loan requests Why we did it How we are doing it Initial results And then I wont tell you what I’ve told you. Honest!
3
Background: Concerns over the ILL budget Traditional management information reports ineffective at informing collection development More detailed analysis of the last two years worth of ILLs Informed purchase of Archival E-journals Collections Identified some book titles requested via ILLs that might usefully have been added to stock
4
ILL requests by format and school
5
Justification for the pilot “15 (book) titles were requested more than once by customers from MHM and 9 of these had been renewed, 16 titles had been requested more than once by customers from HHS and 13 of these had been renewed.” The cost of these multiple requests could be “of the same order of magnitude as the cost of purchasing the book outright”
6
My buy-in/agenda Annette Moore’s presentation at Interlend 2015, “Instant fulfilment: Using Patron Driven Acquisitions to Satisfy Inter-library Loans at the University of Sussex” Literally a Light Bulb moment Need to improve our book supply times (as confirmed by the ILL Benchmarking Project)
7
Pilot Proposal To provide an online form that would enable ILL customers who want to request a book to choose between a traditional ILL request (urgent) and a PDA request (non-urgent) That the different types of request would be routed to either the ILL or Acquisitions Team as appropriate Presented to LSM Meeting in August 2015 and accepted Delay meant we missed the start of the session Opted to run the pilot in the second and third terms
8
Technicalities of operating the pilot A separate online form an over-complication Instead we activated a redundant field in the Clio online request form and made it mandatory Urgent (Equates to 10 days or less) Non-urgent (Equates to longer than ten days) (90% of loan requests are fulfilled within 10 days)
9
Pilot promotion Low key pilot E-mailed all customers who had requested a book since the 2014-15 Academic Session Fliers in all ILL books awaiting collection from November 2015 onwards Online information explains the pros and cons
10
Information provided at login
11
Linked to information
12
The pros and cons Urgent = The request will be fulfilled as quickly as possible = The standard ILL Service Charge will apply = If the item is supplied via ILLs it will have a limited loan period Less than urgent = If the item is purchased for stock it will be permanently available = The request will be free of charge = It may take a little longer
13
Workflow (1) Customer has to choose between Urgent and Non- urgent when submitting a request for a book All requests submitted to the ILL Management System in the first instance All requests auto-checked against Summon All requests auto-checked against EBL
14
Workflow (2) If the title is found on EBL it is switched on and added to our profile The link is sent to the customer by e-mail from within the ILL system The item is received from EBL as a supplier, due back today and returned today
15
Workflow (3) If the request was Urgent and the title isn’t found on EBL it is auto-checked against the British Library Catalogue and processed as a traditional ILL If the request was Non-urgent the request is forwarded to our Acquisitions team Acquisitions check for e-book or print copy availability on Dawsons and Coutts (within 24 hours) If the title is available within the £120 price limit it is ordered
16
Workflow (4) If the title is available electronically Acquisitions send the customer the link and copy ILLs in If a print copy is ordered, when it arrives Acquisitions reserve it for the customer, e-mail them that it is awaiting collection and copy ILLs in If the title is available but above the £120 limit the appropriate Subject Librarian is asked to decide If the title cannot be traced for purchase the request is bounced back to the ILL team who process it as a traditional ILL
17
How requests were submitted
18
How requests were fulfilled
19
Supply times EBL: Quickest = 0 Slowest = 30 Average = 1.34 days Non-EBL e-books: Quickest = 0 Slowest = 30 Average = 6.5 Print purchases: Quickest = 3 Slowest = 90 Average = 36 “book supply times from Dawson are: 80% of orders are received by the library within 3 weeks or 15 working days, however, if the books are delivered in a busy period processing can take 4 weeks”
20
Customer Feedback Hardly a ‘dicky bird’ A few “can you tell me what has happened to my request” type enquiries 5 requests for a duplicate ILL request after an e- copy already supplied No actual complaints. So far! Customer comments questionnaire about to be circulated
21
Benefits so far E-Book supply within 0 days ! Wow! It directly connects customer need to collection development (G, B or I) New skills for the ILL Team Cross team working
22
What next? Complete the pilot at the end of the Financial Year Undertake customer satisfaction survey Analyse EBL behaviour and related costs Compile other costs Assess the usefulness of the titles for stock Evaluate the success of the new workflow and decide whether to adopt permanently
23
And here’s what I’ve just told you Only joking! Thanks for listening Acknowledgements: CLS Internal report: Harnessing Patron Driven Acquisition and ILLs in tandem to satisfy customer need and add desirable items to Library Stock, University of Huddersfield Lightbulb graphic by Savio Ferreira (Own work) [Public Domain] via Wikimedia commons Annette Moore’s presentation at Interlend 2015, “Instant fulfilment: Using Patron Driven Acquisitions to Satisfy Inter- library Loans at the University of Sussex”
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.