2012 electronic resources & libraries conference

6
This article was downloaded by: [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zürich] On: 12 July 2014, At: 02:43 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Serials Review Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usrv20 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference Kate Silton Contributor a a Electronic Resources Librarian, F.D. Bluford Library, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, NC 27411, USA Published online: 06 Dec 2013. To cite this article: Kate Silton Contributor (2012) 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference, Serials Review, 38:3, 206-210, DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2012.10765462 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2012.10765462 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Upload: kate

Post on 27-Jan-2017

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

This article was downloaded by: [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zürich]On: 12 July 2014, At: 02:43Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Serials ReviewPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usrv20

2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries ConferenceKate Silton Contributora

a Electronic Resources Librarian, F.D. Bluford Library, North Carolina A&T StateUniversity, Greensboro, NC 27411, USAPublished online: 06 Dec 2013.

To cite this article: Kate Silton Contributor (2012) 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference, Serials Review, 38:3,206-210, DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2012.10765462

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2012.10765462

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

4. Responding to Change: Creative Approaches to CurrentSerials Challenges

This panel discussion on the changing nature of serials work fea-tured representatives from two libraries and one publisher. DeniseBranch (assistant head of acquisitions and serials, Virginia Common-wealth University) kicked off the panel by outlining her departments'procedures for handling e-journal problems. They used the interlibraryloan parser within SFX to create a system for reporting access problems.A PHP script populates a form with the bibliographic data from the re-source in question,which triggers a notification to library staff. This sys-tem allows their staff to provide more seamless access to libraryresources and helps increase their users' confidence in the value of thelibrary and its staff.

Cheri Duncan (director of acquisitions and cataloging) and SarahBrett (e-resources and serials manager) of James Madison Universitydiscussed changes that were made to accommodate increased spend-ing on electronic resources. Duncan discussed how she realigned herdepartment, streamlined workflows, and leveraged new technologiessuch as iPads. Brett focused on new processes within the department,including a problem-based approach to access and holdings errors.Future projects include eliminating print journal check-in and even-tually moving to a next generation integrated library system.

The final panelist focused on changes in serials in the publishingworld. Patricia Hudson (associate director of institutional marketing foronline products, Oxford University Press) discussed the ways that mar-keting journals have changed during her career. In an increasingly elec-tronic environment, Oxford utilizes a number of different businessmodels, such as open access, patron-driven acquisition, and title-by-titleselection. The nature of journals themselves has changed as the impor-tance of issues has decreased and the distinction between serials andmonographs has blurred. In order to integrate their holdings in the cur-rent digital environment, Oxford has created a product called The OxfordIndex, which will eventually index all of their online content.

5. The (All Too Familiar!) Journal Cancellation Review: ProvenTechniques for Eliciting Quality Feedback

Susan Swogger (collections development librarian) and ChristieDegener (head of resource management services) of the HealthSciences Library at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hillpresented on the reconstruction of their journal review process.With the goals of obtaining a high response rate and with minimizingthe effort for participants in mind, librarians worked with informa-tion technology staff to create a feedback database that wouldallow their users to rate journal subscriptions for retention and can-cellation. They used usage statistics and other factors to create a

targeted list of titles that might be good candidates for cancellation.When the process was first conducted in 2009, strong feedback wasreceived. Participants' status and affiliation helped library staff navi-gate ratings and comments. In order to determine whether or not atitle would be dropped, they considered the percentage of positive(must keep or keep if possible) ratings, the type of comments, audi-ence size, and subject area impact.

After aggregating the results, cancellations were made, and a num-ber of other titleswere kept in reserve in case further cuts were needed.The library announced the results of the survey to their user communityand gave users a process to appeal cancellation decisions. They repeatedthe survey in 2010 and 2011 with different targeted lists of titles. Inaddition to these changes, the library increased their marketing of thesurvey by increasing its presence on their Web pages and by creatingspecific signage for print journals and notes for online journals thatwere under review.

6. Closing Keynote Address: Will Books Be Different?

Kevin Guthrie (president of ITHAKA) spoke about JSTOR's moveinto book digitization and how it differs from the company's originalwork of digitizing journals. He emphasized that while the distinctionbetween books and journals grows increasingly hazy, use of books ismore variable than that of journals, which makes their successful dig-itization more difficult. The landscape has also changed drasticallyover the past decade, both in terms of funding and in terms of theway that the Internet is used. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, gov-ernment money was widely available and universities were able togrow their endowments. Currently, all institutions feel the effects ofthe economic downturn and have to make sacrifices in order to addnew resources to library collections. The Internet has changed frombeing driven by the academy to being driven by corporations. Whilethe rise of the consumer Web has increased the use of academic re-sources, it creates an environment in which these resources need tocompete with commercial products.

Guthrie spoke at length about the unique challenges of digitizingbooks. One challenge is the difference between the institutional marketversus the consumer market. The institutional market has historicallydriven journal purchasing,whereas e-books have beendriven by the con-sumermarket. Ownership and preservation are important factors as wellsince institutions want to ensure that they can use e-books in a variety ofways and that they will have access to them in the long-term. Anothermajor issue is the varyingways inwhich books are consumed, particular-ly in an academic setting, and the devices that are used to consume them.Since use of books varies greatly and since users currently access bookson a variety of devices, determining a transformative way to usee-books in an academic setting is not yet in reach.

doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2012.08.020

2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

Kate Silton, ContributorElectronic Resources Librarian, F.D. Bluford Library, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, NC 27411, USA

1. Introduction

The seventh annual Electronic Resources & Libraries (ER&L) Confer-ence, which was held April 2-4, 2012 in Austin, TX, offered over forty

sessions covering a variety of topics in electronic resources managementand digital services. For the first time, the conference had a virtual com-ponent, allowing participants to watch real-time Webcasts of select pre-sentations. The conference included keynotes by Andrea Resmini andBrandon Butler, a panel discussion on leadership in libraries, and sessionsin a number of tracks including Collection Development, Emerging andE-mail address: [email protected].

206 Blythe / Serials Review 38 (2012) 205–212

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 02:

43 1

2 Ju

ly 2

014

Page 3: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

Future Technologies,Managing Electronic Resources in Libraries, Scholar-ly Communication, Standards, and Workflow and Organizations.

2. Opening Keynote (Monday): Andrea Resmini

Andrea Resmini (president, The Information Architecture Instituteand researcher, University of Borâs, Sweden) kicked off the confer-ence with a presentation entitled “Between Physical and Digital:Understanding Cross-Channel Experience.” Resmini discussed how li-braries can look to a variety of sources, including books, movies, andretail stores, in order to understand how to provide more integratedservices to their users. His central thesis is the cross-channel experi-ence in which consumers gain access to the items or experiencesthat they want or need in a holistic and seamless way.

In an age when cyberspace is not a separate place but in factwoven into every aspect of life, librarians should be conscious of theway information flows throughout their users’ experience. Usersmay seek out information, such as a book, in a variety of ways andon different devices. With retailers successfully integrating in-personand online shopping, users expect a similar level of service from li-braries. Information architectures that enable this cross-channel ex-perience become dynamic, hybrid ecosystems where services andexperiences are exchanged.

Resmini cites the toymaker Build-A-Bearworkshop as an exemplarymodel of a cross-channel experience. Build-A-Bear's customers create apersonalized stuffed animal and then give it life by using it as an avatarin an online world called Bearville. By selling the experience of creatinga customized toy and participating in an online community, this compa-ny delivers much more than a consumer transaction. Libraries canemulate this cross-channel experience by looking at their services, or-ganizational structures, systems, and access points in order to under-stand how all of these pieces work together to shape user experience.

3. Opening Keynote (Tuesday): Brandon Butler

The second day of the conference began with a talk by BrandonButler (director of public policy initiatives, Association of Research Li-braries) entitled “New ARL Best Practices in Fair Use.” Butler beganwith a reminder that copyright is intended to promote the creationof culture, not to help creators of culture get paid. The doctrine offair use is in place to allow the use of copyright material under aloosely defined set of circumstances. Butler stressed that fair use is aspace of creativity for lawyers and judges with the four factors serv-ing as boundaries.

The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) created the Code ofBest Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries to give li-braries a set of principles to guide fair use. Butler stated that judgeshave previously deferred to the norms and values of a communityof practice when determining whether a use of copyrighted materialfalls under fair use. For instance, the documentary film-making com-munity created a code of best practices to enable them to make filmsthat contained copyrighted material. Similarly, libraries can use theARL code to apply fair use in ways that enhance their mission of pro-viding access to information. While the code does not guarantee thata judge will deem a library's use of copyrighted materials allowableunder fair use, it gives libraries and their counsel a good idea of thelevel of risk associated with common scenarios for fair use.

4. Collection Development and Assessment Track

The Collection Development and Assessment Track focuses on in-novative ways to build and assess library collections. Topics coveredduring this year's conference included the analysis of usage dataand making acquisition and cancellation decisions.

Jo Lambert (project coordinator, Mimas, University of Manches-ter) discussed the creation of a collaborative usage statistics project

in the United Kingdom in a presentation entitled “The Journal UsageStatistics Portal (JUSP): Helping Libraries Measure Usage and Impact.”JUSP is a collaborative project created by JISC (Joint Information Sys-tems Committee) Collections, Mimas at the University of Manchester,Evidence Base at Birmingham City University, and Cranfield Universi-ty. JUSP collects and provides access to usage data for 134 libraries,which encompasses almost all institutions of higher education inthe United Kingdom. Data comes from twenty-one publishers andthree intermediaries. They created their own SUSHI server so thatmember libraries only have to configure one to work with their sys-tems. This project is beneficial to member libraries because it savesthem time and allows them to look at usage data in a variety ofways. While JUSP only serves UK libraries, their SUSHI client is freelyavailable as open source software.

The addition of discovery into the library environment requiresanalysis of the usage of services as well as of resources. John Law(vice president of discovery services, Serials Solutions) put togethera panel called “Analytics Data in the Discovery Age” that includedshort presentations from several libraries using Serials Solutions’Summon. Roberta Astroff (head, Downtown Campus Library, Univer-sity of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA)) talked about how Summonmeets the needs of UTSA's interdisciplinary graduate programs. Shestated that Summon helps connect users to related research thatwouldn't be found in discipline-specific databases. Bobby Reeves(electronic resources applications administrator, American University(AU)) discussed AU's approach to evaluating use of Summon, whichincludes looking at Summon usage data, link resolver statistics,COUNTER reports from native databases, Google Analytics, and qual-itative surveys. He stressed the importance of looking at all of themetrics together since changes in one area do not necessarily tellthe whole story. Jeannie Castro (electronic resources coordinator,University of Houston) looked at pre and post Summon usage of jour-nal subscriptions. Overall, she noticed an increase in searches and ses-sions in native databases for content in the Summon central index.Finally, Jeff Daniels (head of technical services and electronic resourcesmanagement, Grand Valley State University (GVSU)) discussed howSummon has changed the way resources are used in the two and halfyears since it was launched at GVSU. While searches and sessions ofabstract and indexing databases have decreased and full-text usage ofe-journals has increased, these changes have not yet led GVSU to cancelany resources.

A common theme throughout the conference was using collectiondata to make cancellation decisions. David Beales (college librarianfor engineering at California Polytechnic State University, San LuisObispo) gave a presentation entitled “Challenging the Big Deal: ACase Study from the UK” that detailed a model that he created to de-termine the value of cancelling big deals. When Beales worked at Im-perial College, he developed this model during Research LibrariesUK's negotiations with several major publishers. This model was cre-ated as a precautionary measure in the event that negotiations brokedown and sought to predict the extent of lost access over a twelvemonth period if one of their big deals was discontinued. They wantedto see whether individual subscriptions to key titles and documentdelivery would suffice. While it was clear that losing access for ayear for some publishers would be feasible, this model cannot predictsavings over a longer period.

While many presentations focused on cancellation of resources,“Trials by Juries: Suggested Practices for Database Trials” remindedattendees of the increasing need to be judicious about examiningnew resources. Annis Lee Adams (reference and electronic resourceslibrarian, Golden Gate University), Jon Ritterbus (electronic resourceslibrarian, University of Nebraska-Kearney), and Christine Ryan (elec-tronic resources librarian, Clemson University) discussed variouscriteria that their respective libraries use when deciding to conducttrials. Important themes included the need to be selective in choosingresources for trial, targeted promotion to key potential users, and the

207Blythe / Serials Review 38 (2012) 205–212

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 02:

43 1

2 Ju

ly 2

014

Page 4: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

importance of soliciting quality feedback. Results were mixed aboutwho in the library should be responsible for setting up trials, howmany potential users should be given access, and whether trialsshould be conducted when funds are not available.

5. Emerging and Future Technologies

Discovery services were also addressed in the Emerging and Fu-ture Technologies track. Kate Silton (electronic resources librarian,North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University) and MayYan (electronic resources librarian, Ryerson University) discussedtheir respective libraries’ approaches to assessing Summon in “IfYou Build it, Will They Come?” Silton spoke about her library's effortsto assess the effectiveness and usefulness of Summon. She regularlytested the frequency with which North Carolina A&T's instance ofSummon delivers the full text of an article for a sample search.While the full text is currently delivered about two-thirds of thetime, Silton noted that access for scholarly providers, as well as forproviders that allow direct linking, is much more reliable. This ap-proach helps determine the cause of access problems that can becaused by factors beyond Summon, such as the link resolver. Yan de-scribed Ryerson's engagement with their constituents regarding useand satisfaction with Summon. Yan and three other colleagues usedsurveys and focus groups to solicit feedback on who uses Summonand how it is used. Via surveys, they determined that a majority ofrespondents had used Summon, primarily for writing papers, andthat most respondents found it extremely easy or very easy to use.However, the majority of respondents only found it very easy or mod-erately easy to find the resources that they needed, and their satisfac-tion level was closely tied with that metric. Focus groups withstudents, faculty, and staff yielded both positive and negative feed-back. One encouraging finding was that the majority of faculty mem-bers who had used Summon would recommend it to their colleaguesand students.

6. Managing E-Resources in Libraries

Electronic Resources Management Systems (ERMS) have consis-tently been a hot topic at the past several ER&L conferences. Two ses-sions were devoted to “All You Can ERMS: Laying out the Buffet ofeResource Management Systems,” a panel discussion featuring librar-ians using a variety of ERMS and in different stages of implementationand usage. Jill Emery (collection development librarian, PortlandState University) served as moderator, and panelists were: C. DerrikHiatt (electronic resources librarian, Wake Forest University), XanArch (collection development librarian, Reed College), Mary Bailey(continuing resources librarian, Kansas State University), MarthaRice Sanders (knowledge management librarian for HELIN Consor-tium), Marie Kennedy (serials and electronic resources librarian,Loyola Marymount University), John Holm (electronic resources li-brarian, Norwich University), Anna Creech (electronic resources li-brarian, University of Richmond), and Dani Roach (head of serialsand electronic resource acquisitions, University of St. Thomas). Sys-tems represented included CORAL, Innovative Interfaces, Inc.'s (III)ERM, Serials Solutions 360 Resource Manager, Ex Libris's Verde, andOCLC's WorldShare Management Services. One theme that emergedfrom this discussion was the usefulness of ERMS as a communica-tion tool in terms of serving as a repository of information aboute-resources and in terms of workflow. Another common theme wasthe need for increased interoperability between the ERMS and othersystems. All panelists saw a need for ERMS in the future, and severalexpressed hope that integrated systems such as OCLC's WorldShareManagement Services, Ex Libris's Alma and III's Sierra will address in-teroperability issues. This hope was addressed by representativesfrom the major ERMS vendors (Ashley Bass of Serials Solutions,

Steve McCann of OCLC, Tony Zanders of Ex Libris, and Bob McQuillanof III) who stressed that integration was a priority for them as well.

Young Moon (head of continuing and electronic resources) andErika Johnson (electronic resources and technical services librarian)of Boston College Libraries detailed their experience as a developmentpartner for one of these new systems. Their presentation, “Inventingthe Futurewith Ex Libris Alma,” gave a preview of Alma and highlightedhow it differs from current integrated library systems on the market.Alma is a unified resource management system (URMS) that takes theplace of the ILS, link resolver, ERMS, and other systems currently usedby libraries to manage resources. Moon and Johnson detailed the expe-rience of being development partners, the active role they played intesting and development, and the reality of migrating data into thenew system. At present, they hope to have all of their data from previ-ous systemsmigrated by June. Challenges to this process includefindingthe time to do testing and evaluation, keeping an openmind in the faceof a work-in-progress, and the need to involve more and more staff asAlma becomes more fully realized. They stated that being a develop-ment partner was a great opportunity because it gave them influenceover the new system, encouraged them to rethink and improve theirworkflows and organization, and opened up opportunities for collabo-ration with other partner institutions.

While vendors play a large role in new solutions for e-resourcesmanagement, open source projects play an important role as well.Maria Collins (head of content acquisitions and licensing) and KristenWilson (associate head of content acquisitions and licensing) of NorthCarolina State University Libraries spoke about the Global OpenKnowledgeBase (GOKb), which is a Mellon grant funded project to cre-ate a freely available knowledgebase of publication information aboute-resources at the title and package level. This project is related toKuali Open Library Environment (OLE), which is a community-createdlibrary management system, and JISC, which will add an internationalperspective. The data in GOKb, which will be maintained by Kuali OLEand JISC member libraries, will be freely available. The GOKb project,aswell as Kuali OLE, reflects a need for systems that are fully integrated,that support all e-resources, and that are knowledgebase-centric. Thefirst stage of the GOKb project involves creating a data model that willaccurately capture the way that electronic resources are bundled andwill leverage information that is needed to do thework of providing ac-cess, such as the relationships between titles, packages, and platforms.

“A Penny Spent is a Penny Saved” focused on supplementary prod-ucts in addition to ERMS that can help with making collection deci-sions and with resource management. Doralyn Rossmann (teamleader/collection development librarian, Montana State University)talked about using Serials Solutions’ 360 COUNTER product in con-junction with 360 Resource Manager and EBSCONET to analyze herlibrary's individual journal subscriptions and ultimately make cancel-lations. Mike Poulin (head of digital resources and initiatives, ColgateUniversity) discussed a project in which data from Millennium and360 COUNTER were fed into a Filemaker Pro database that was usedto analyze all of their individual and package subscriptions. JasonPrice (science and electronic resources librarian, Claremont Colleges)talked about using Pubget PaperStats to run reports containing yearsof usage data and pricing information to make collection decisions.

Steven Sowell (head of collections and resource sharing depart-ment, Oregon State University Libraries) gave a presentation entitled“Next Steps in Transforming Academic Libraries: Radical Redesign toMainstream E-Resources Management” that focused on the humanaspects of e-resources management, rather than on systems. His talkfocused on his library's decision to reorganize in response to theuniversity's realignment. His department, which was newly createdduring this process, focuses on user centered collections and services.With the goal of making e-resources management the foundationaround which his department's work was done, Sowell rewrote jobdescriptions, led his team in group planning, and implemented pro-cess mapping. His department's work is grounded in the idea of

208 Blythe / Serials Review 38 (2012) 205–212

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 02:

43 1

2 Ju

ly 2

014

Page 5: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

service design, in which processes are developed around the ways inwhich users interact with a service.

7. Scholarly Communication

Several programs in the Scholarly Communications track focusedon libraries’ expanding role in the research process through publish-ing and data curation. Allyson Mower (scholarly communicationsand copyright librarian, University of Utah), in a presentation entitled“Library Publishing Services: Strategies for Success” discussed anIMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Services) grant funded projectthat assessed the state of publishing activity within academic librar-ies. The project, which was comprised of a survey, case studies, anddata collected at workshops, indicated that publishing journals andconference proceedings is increasingly becoming a core activity of li-braries. According to these instruments, libraries were motivated tobecome publishers in order to make an impact on scholarly publish-ing and to contribute to their institutional goals. While libraries usedifferent technologies for their publication efforts, Mower's presenta-tion indicated that the Public Knowledge Project's Open Journal Soft-ware is most frequently used by survey respondents. In addition todetermining the state of publishing in libraries, this project alsosought to develop recommendations for advancing this activity.These recommendations include creating impact metrics, developing acentrally hosted software system, fostering more opportunities fortraining, and establishing full-timepublishing positionswithin libraries.

In addition to publishing, libraries play a role in the creation andstorage of research data. Heather Coates (digital scholarship and datamanagement librarian, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianap-olis) discussed libraries’ role in this part of the research process in “Op-portunities in Data Curation: Integrating the Library into the ResearchProcess.” Major funders of research, including the National Institutesof Health and the National Science Foundation, require data manage-ment plans. Since data management requirements vary by fundingsource and by community of practice, libraries can play a role in helpingtheir institutions to preserve and share their data. Librarians, as expertsin preserving and providing access to information, can provide infra-structure and metadata for data sets. Librarians can also assist withthe proposal process by helping researchers negotiate rights to theirpublished research and by building data preservation networks withother institutions. Coates stressed the importance of outreach and rela-tionship building between librarians and researchers and suggestedthat librarians establish themselves as equal partners in the researchculture at their institution.

8. Standards

Standards play an important role in e-resources management andthus received a lot of attention at this conference. “The Future of ERMWorkflow Support and License Expression Data Standards” providedan update on the latest ERM standards work and on the realities ofworkingwith license expression andworkflow. Tim Jewell (director, in-formation resources, collections and scholarly communication, Univer-sity of Washington), who co-chairs the National Information StandardsOrganization (NISO) ERM Data Standards and Best Practices ReviewWorking Group, discussed this group's examination of standards andbest practices related to e-resource management. Their findings werewritten up in a report entitled Making Good on the Promise of ERM: AStandards and Best Practices Discussion Paper, which is available on theNISO Web site at http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/7946/Making_Good_on_the_Promise_of_ERM.pdf. Some areas ofconcern that the group identified include interoperability (especiallyin the areas of cost and usage data), license expression and the lack ofwidespread adoption of ONIX for Publications Licenses (ONIX-PL) byvendors and publishers, and the need for standards and practices thatare truly useful for workflow.

Ben Heet (senior technical analyst, University of Notre Dame)talked about license expression and workflow in the context ofCORAL. When developing the licensing module of CORAL, ONIX-PLwas considered but ultimately not chosen since it wasn't being usedextensively. From a practical standpoint, every license is unique,and every license has different terms that need to be expressed.Tracking only the aspects needed for each specific license simplifiesthe process and reduces the overall amount of data that needs to betracked. In terms of workflow, CORAL was developed to ensure thatwork didn't fall by the wayside. The workflow engine alerts differentindividuals when they need to complete a step for a particular re-source rather than dictating exactly how the work needs to be done.The workflow rules are customizable for different types of resourcesand to suit institution-specific procedures.

Finally, Maria Collins (head of content acquisitions and licensing,North Carolina State University Libraries) discussed licensing andworkflows in Kuali OLE. After much consideration, including inputfrom users and subject matter experts, the Kuali OLE team ultimatelychose to use ONIX-PL. While they have some concerns about the stan-dard, including those mentioned earlier by Heet, the standard shouldbecome more workable through the creation of a new editor. As forworkflow, over 1200 user stories were gathered to inform this impor-tant functionality of Kuali OLE. The first release will focus on acquisi-tions for both print and electronic resources and will includereminders, messaging, and routing.

A second panel about standards focused directly on the work ofNISO. Nettie Lagace (associate director for programs, NISO) began“Working for You: NISO Standards and Best Practices” with an over-view of NISO's work. She described the process by which NISO facili-tates the development of standards and recommended practices.When assigning a working group to develop a best practice or a stan-dard, NISO takes great care to ensure that the group includes a bal-ance of librarians, vendors, and other interested parties (such asprofessional organizations). Lagace emphasized that NISO always so-licits new work items and that she is available to develop an existingproblem into a narrative for consideration.

John Law (vice president of discovery services, Serials Solutions) andJamene Brooks-Kieffer (resource linking librarian, Kansas State Univer-sity) talked about the Open Discovery Initiative, a recent NISO workitem. The goal of this work item is to bring together discovery servicevendors, content providers, and libraries in order to make Web scalediscovery more efficient. By May 2013, this group will have created astandard vocabulary for discovery and recommended practices to facil-itate communication between the three stakeholder groups. This work-ing group seeks participation from all three groups, and encouragesstakeholders to participate in the group's information gathering activi-ties via the project Web site, interest group listserv, e-mail, and via anopen teleconference to take place on April 9, 2012.

Oliver Pesch (chief strategist, e-Resources at EBSCO) discussed thelatest work on Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative(SUSHI). Unlike most NISO standards, which are revised about onceevery five years, SUSHI is updatedmore frequently. A standing commit-teemeets on amonthly basis to addressmaintenance of the standard. Inorder to facilitative the adoption of SUSHI, an open access SUSHI clientcalled MISO was developed. In addition, SUSHI is now a requirementfor COUNTER compliance, which is an incentive for vendors to partici-pate. Ongoing work on the standard includes the creation of a SUSHIserver test mode and status report that will allow users to determinewhether a server is operable and which reports are on it.

9. Workflow and Organizations

The workflow and organizations track dealt with the changes thatan increasingly electronic environment brings to libraries as organiza-tions. Rosalyn Raeford (head, cataloging and metadata services) andBeverly Dowdy (head, electronic resources and serials management)

209Blythe / Serials Review 38 (2012) 205–212

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 02:

43 1

2 Ju

ly 2

014

Page 6: 2012 Electronic Resources & Libraries Conference

of Duke University Libraries discussed how their organization adaptedto take a more proactive approach to e-resource management in a pre-sentation entitled “Electronic ResourcesWorkflowAnalysis and ProcessImprovement.” After patrons complained in a LibQUAL+ survey thatthey were not satisfied with current access to e-resources, library staffat Duke knew that their ad hoc approach to managing access was notenough. They needed to document and analyze their processes and de-sign a workflow that minimized the likelihood of e-resource problems.They used the e-resource life cycle as a guide and developed a staffresponsibility matrix. After interviewing all staff that worked withe-resources, they created a workflow diagram. They used the diagramto identify problem areas and improve those processes. Ultimately,they decided to take a more proactive troubleshooting approach byestablishing quality control processes and by making it easier for pa-trons to report problems. They have also investigated different tools toaid this transition. They use JTacq, a free collection development andpurchasing application, to streamline the acquisitions process byharvesting data from a variety of sources and converting it into MARCformat to create order and bibliographic records. They use SharePointas a meeting space for the team that works on e-resources and are con-sidering ImageNow as a document management system.

10. Closing Leadership Panel: Leading from the Top, Bottom andMiddle: Owning Your Library Leadership

The 2012 ER&L Conference concluded with a panel on leadership.The panel, which was moderated by Jill Emery (collection develop-ment librarian, Portland State University), included the followingleaders in the field: Karen Schneider (library director, Holy NamesUniversity), Char Booth (instruction manager and e-learning librari-an, Claremont Colleges Library), and Bonnie Tijerina (assistant direc-tor for collections services, Claremont University Consortium andpresident, Electronic Resources & Libraries, LLC). Emery asked forone word that each panelist felt best described leadership. Booth'sword was clarity since clear communication is needed to articulatewhat needs to be done. Tijerina chose integrity as inspiring others re-quires being true to oneself. Schneider's word was optimism as agood leader needs to believe that they are going to succeed.

Motivation was an important theme in this discussion, both interms of finding the motivation to bring about change and in termsof motivating other people. Emery asked the panelists where eachof them found the motivation to work outside of their primary jobto influence the profession. Tijerina stated that she is motivated if apossible solution to a problem seems like an achievable possibility.She talked about seeing the need for opportunities for e-resources li-brarians to get together, which ultimately led to the creation of theER&L Conference. Booth's response was that she found library workto be critically important and that the desire to work in libraries is acalling. Schneider talked about how the Internet filtering debate inthe late 1990s served as a catalyst for her extended service to the pro-fession. Emery also asked the panel how they motivate and inspiretheir colleagues. Schneider stressed the importance of helping peoplesee their ability to succeed and of appreciating their work. Tijerinatalked about working with two different types of leaders during theearly days of ER&L. One type was supportive, and the other was crit-ical, but both were influential because they gave her a balance be-tween unbridled enthusiasm and the pragmatism needed to actuallyexecute her idea.

Another theme that emerged was discomfort with self-identifyingas a leader. Both Booth and Schneider had reservations about partic-ipating in a panel on leadership. Booth stated that she associates arro-gance with the term and that modeling leadership might be moreeffective than assigning it as a label. Schneider said that she feelsthe need to overcome her discomfort and claim the role of leader, es-pecially since libraries vitally need representation. Tijerina discussedhow planning and executing a conference was a great leadership op-portunity for her as an introvert. In the first several years of the con-ference, she could do the behind the scenes work beforehand andthen experience and appreciate the conference as a participant. In re-cent years, she has becomemore of a public figure for ER&L. However,if her goal had been to be the face of the conference, the work neededto make it succeed wouldn't have gotten done. One audience memberexpressed the importance of having a broader view of leadership thatisn't wholly based on extraverted personality, and another urged hercolleagues to embrace leadership roles and reminded them that lead-ership often starts from the bottom of an organization.

doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2012.08.021

2012 UKSG Conference

Alice EngElectronic Resources Librarian, Thomas G. Carpenter Library, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA

1. Introduction

UKSG held their thirty-fifth annual conference at the ScottishExhibition and Conference Centre in Glasgow, Scotland. Over 850people from various parts of the world attended. Delegates weremostly information professionals specializing in serials collections.

2. Opening Session

The opening session consisted of greetings from Bob Winter(Glasgow City Council) and from Steve Shadle (president, North

American Serials Interest Group (NASIG)). UKSG chair, Tony Kidd,presented a tribute to UKSG founder John Merriman. Ian Bannerman(Taylor & Francis) announced the recipients of the 2012 JohnMerrimanJoint NASIG/UKSG Award, which was presented to the sponsoredstudents, Alice Eng (University of North Florida) and Stephen Buck(Dublin City University), by Felix Haest (Elsevier).

3. Day One Sessions

The first plenary session, “Refocusing Our Future,” featured twospeakers. Stephen Abram (vice president for strategic partnershipsand markets, Cengage Learning (Gale)) presented “Sharing- TheFoundation of Social Institutions,” and Martin Paul Eve (associateE-mail address: [email protected].

210 Blythe / Serials Review 38 (2012) 205–212

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 02:

43 1

2 Ju

ly 2

014