Optimization of ILL Student Employees and Resources through Departmental ConsolidationPresented by Joyce Melvin and Michael Straatmann
Or
Getting Together to
do More with Less
Presented by Joyce Melvin and Michael Straatmann
Joyce MelvinInterlibrary Loan Manager
User Services, University of Nebraska Lincoln
Michael StraatmannCirculation Manager
User Services, University of Nebraska Lincoln
BACKGROUND
University of Nebraska – Lincoln• ARL Library, Center for Institutional
Cooperation• Largest library in Nebraska – 3.4 million
volumes
2011-12• 145,000 circulated items• 807,000 walk-in users
• 103,000+ ILL loans with 77% fill rate65% Lending & Document Delivery
Trends at UNL Libraries• Circulation trends continue in seeing a
decrease in number of items physically circulated.
• Interlibrary loan trends continue in seeing an increase in number of items both lent and borrowed.
• Off-site/High-Density storage removes a significant percentage of collection out of direct patron access.
Steps forward? In 2012, it was encouraged that
these two departments at UNL should undertake a feasibility
study for these two units to merge, both physically and
organizationally.
• Literature Review (see Bibliography)
• Consultants (Rayna Bowlby, Lars Leon, and Barbara Preece)
But, I thought this was about students…
WHERE WE STARTED
“Old” Circulation Space
Facilities
StaffingCirculation – 8.0 FTE•Desk Supervisor•Evening Supervisor•Stacks Management•Reserves•Fines/Billing•Delivery
Interlibrary Loan – 6.5 FTE• Borrowing• Lending• Document Delivery• Reception
Student Staffing
ILL Tasks – 1.5 FTE• Scanning• Copying• Retrieval• Shipping• Delivery
Circulation Tasks – 5.5 FTE• Sorting• Shelving• Shelf-reading• Inventory• Barcoding• Staffing Service Points
Student Supervision• Circulation Students
– Desk Supervisor– Stacks Supervisor
• ILL Students– Student Supervisor– All staff – functional supervisors/trainers
Staff Interviews
• Workflows
• Position Descriptions
• General feelings and thoughts about potential futures
Internal Working Groups
• Aimed for balance of “innovators”, “traditionalists” and “slow-adopters”
• 3 groups of staff, 1 group of managers• Additionally, each manager was assigned as a
mentor to each group• Each group was tasked with creating a model
of integration. – How would the new department function?– How would reporting work?– How would students be best utilized?– Etc.
Services and ResourcesEach group was allowed to present to everyone
and were queried on:
• What resources would be needed for the plan?• What services would be impacted? Improved?• Why was their plan the best?
WHERE WE AIMED FOR
Ground Rules• Maintaining a sense of continuity for staff by
proceeding with the basic premises of the community-designed integration plan.
• Emphasizing the integration of our unit into one cohesive whole, negating any plan which might revert “us” back into Circulation and ILL.
• Utilize already existing management and supervisory knowledges and strengths.
• Must improve services and efficiencies!
Collation of Plans• Managerial/Mentor group was tasked with
collating each of the plans, while observing the ground rules.
• Plan was then presented back to staff.
• In order to succeed, it was strongly felt that staff buy-in was essential.
Costs?• Physical
– Remodeling of space– New furnishings and equipment
• Personnel– Student turn-over– Additional training (cross-unit)
• Services– Some slow down during adjustment phase
Facilities
StaffingBorrowing & Customer Service
Reserves ILL Borrowing
Desk Services • Evening Supervisor• Fines/Billing• Reception• Desk Supervisor
Materials & Student Employees • Student Supervisor • ILL Lending Staff• Delivery• Stacks Management
Student Staffing
• Sorting• Shelving• Shelf-reading• Inventory• Barcoding
• Retrieval• Scanning• Copying• Shipping• Staffing Service Points
Combined Student Staff – 5.5 FTE
Student Supervision• One Student Supervisor
– Responsible for all training and supervision– Rely on other staff to provide needs and
supplement training
• Exception– Desk student scheduling
WHAT WE GOT!
Unforeseen Changes
Shifting Organizational Priorities
How to Respond?
Staffing
Borrowing and Reserves7.0 FTE
– Reserves – ILL Borrowing– Fines/Billing– Reception
Circulation and Materials 8.5 FTE
– Desk Supervisor– Student Supervisor – ILL Lending Staff– Delivery– Stacks
Management– Evening Supervisor
Student Staffing
• Sorting• Shelving• Shelf-reading• Inventory• Barcoding
• Retrieval• Scanning• Copying• Shipping
Combined Student Staff – 3.0 FTE
Staffing Service Points – 1.5 FTE - MIA
DOES IT WORK?
QuantitativeILL Turnaround Times•Copies – Searching & Scanning
Lending Reduced 43%Doc Delivery Reduced 13%
•Loans – SearchingLending Reduced 11%Doc Delivery Reduced 7%
Student Employees– Wage Budget Reduced 5%– Hours Reduced 30%
Anecdotal
Improved CommunicationsMore Resources for Tasks & Training
Improved ShippingMore Interests in New TasksMore Dynamic Environment
Better Morale – for everybody!
WHAT’S NEXT ?
Bibliography• Alarid, T. & Sullivan, C. (2009). Welcome to the neighborhood:
Merger of interlibrary loan with access services. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 19, 219-225.
• Austin, B. (2010). Moving beyond the amalgam. Journal of Access Services, 7(3), 145-58.
• Cheung, Ophelia; Patrick, Susan; Cameron, Brian D.; Bishop, Elizabeth; and Fraser, Lucina, "Restructuring the Academic Library:Teams-based Management and the Merger of Interlibrary Loans with Circulation and Reserve" (2003). Librarian and Staff Publications. Paper 2. http://digitalcommons.ryerson.ca/library_pubs/2
• Fritts, J. (1993). Sharing the load: a model for interlibrary loan/circulation cooperation. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Information Supply, 4(1), 55-66.
• Tribble, J. (1991). Merging library operations. Library Administration and Management, 5(3), 151-54.
©2007 The Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska. All rights reserved.
Joyce MelvinILL Manager
&Michael StraatmannCirculation Manager
University of Nebraska Lincoln - Libraries
