tina feick, vice president, swets november 1, 2007 niso usage data forum • dallas, tx

ScholarlyStats: How it Utilizes COUNTER andSUSHI Standards, Questions Regarding EffectiveUse, and Future Strategic Plans for the Service

Tina Feick, Vice President, Swets

November 1, 2007

NISO Usage Data Forum • Dallas, TX

© Swets 2007 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 2

www.scholarlystats.com

Integrated monthly usage reports


Swets and ScholarlyStats

OCTOBER 2, 2007

• Swets acquires ScholarlyStats from MPS Technologies

• Exclusive ownership

• MPS Technologies contracted to continue to operate and

develop the service.

• Launched in 2005

• Winner – 2006 Best Library Product Award –

International Information Industry Awards

• Swets – 1st Global Channel Partner – since 2006


Answer a few Quick Questions Upfront

•Will honor the current contractual obligations

•No plans to change the price of ScholarlyStats

•Current distributors and consortia arrangements continued

•Customers informed

•Contact for technical issues to MPS – info on website

•Swets Sales and Customer Service Departments quickly getting up to

speed.

•All orders and invoices from the Swets system.


Why did Swets buy ScholarlyStats?

Swets sees usage statistics as a strategic part of the

acquisition process for libraries. As an intermediary,

Swets’ strategic focus is to match libraries’ needs to

support assimilating holdings, price information and usage

statistics in an integrated environment, offering

customers a true decision support model.

Usage stats are a key decision making tool and becoming

more important.


Why Look At ScholarlyStats?

Current challenges for librarians when collecting usage statistics:

•Large number of vendor sites with very different, and at times confusing,

interfaces

•Some COUNTER publishers are not COUNTER compliant

•Some data not timely (need to keep trying)

•Inconsistent formatting options across vendors

•Regular changes to vendor interfaces

•Report terminology varies

•Merging data together is a “nightmare”

•Rinse and Repeat – every month

•Consortia counting


Some clarifications

• ScholarlyStats agreement is with library and not with publisher

• If a publisher changes access to usage statistics, library must inform or will

be unable to download statistics from the publisher’s website.

• ScholarlyStats does not have the authority at this time to obtain updated

passwords etc.


The solution - ScholarlyStats

Save time collecting and organising reports

Reduce the real cost of managing statistics

Easy to use tools and reports to inform decisions

Clear and consistent reporting formats

Greater insight into how users access


ScholarlyStats

Dashboard Reports

Consolidated Reports


MPS Processing

Delivery to the portal

The process

Collection

Neutralisation Processing,

Consolidation, Dashboard Generation

Permanent access to your reports through portal for customers


Project COUNTER

"The core mission of COUNTER has always been to make usage statistics comparable and useful.

COUNTER does not endorse individual products, but we welcome initiatives like ScholarlyStats

from MPS Technologies that help us meet this goal by making usage statistics more usable and

accessible to libraries."

Peter Shepherd, COUNTER Project Director - www.projectcounter.org


ScholarlyStats Consolidated Reports

Consolidated Journal Report 1

Full-text article requests by Journal Title, Platform

and Month

Consolidated Database Report 1

Searches and Sessions by Month and Database


Turnaways by Month and Service


Searches and Sessions by Month and Service

Currently 46 Platforms 450 Databases70,000 Journals

Including:ACS Publications

Blackwell SynergyElsevier Science

BioOneHighwire PressIngentaConnect

EBSCOhostMeta Press

Nature Publishing GroupProquestScitation

SwetsWiseThomson Gale

…


Kicking off analysis

Dashboard Reports

• Total Number of Journals

• Total Use for each Platform

• Average Use by Platform

• Long Tail - 80:20 usage

• Top 10 Journals by Platform

• Top 50 journals across

Platforms

• Low Usage Journals

• Zero Use Journals

Sample Report: Total journal use by Platform

Sample Report: Average journal use by Platform


COUNTER + SUSHI + ScholarlyStats


SUSHI – ScholarlyStats LOVES SUSHI

As of October 2007 – 15 SUSHI Implementations through:

• Innovative (US)

• Thomson Scientific ISI (US and Australia)

• Do not have to go to ScholarlyStats portal and download reports

• Automatically loaded into ERM

• Tested with Ex Libris Verde ERM system – not in production yet

• Compatible with two versions of the SUSHI standard

0.1 version

1.0 version

•Detailed instructions available


ScholarlyStats Integration Partner

• Detailed process

• Requires signed partner agreement

• SUSHI Testing

• Establish authentication of account

• Currently four partners


SUSHI Considerations

• Very straightforward implementation – 2 days of programming

• Add an additional authentication on IP address – beyond SUSHI

standard – systems can be held at a central or local location

• Only supports JR1 type reports at this time – database reports not

available

• Versioning of reports not supported by the standard

• Adoption is slow with ERM vendors

• Real time generation of reports takes alot of time for big vendors and

libraries

• Looking forward to version 2 - databases


COUNTER and ScholarlyStats

• Major pillar of the ScholarlyStats product

• MPS on board of Project COUNTER

• Want all electronic content providers to utilize

• Even with the COUNTER standard – COUNTER reports vary Put apostrophes around ISSN

Differing naming conventions

• Looking forward to 2.5


SwetsWise Selection Support

Swets is developing SwetsWise Selection Support

•Libraries have many options to acquire content and need to make the

right choices

•Accountability of acquisition decisions becomes more important

•More decision-supporting information available; e.g. usage statistics and

impact factors

•Decision-support information available with different providers and in

many formats

•Not enough resources for libraries to collect and analyze all decision-

support information


SwetsWise Selection Support

Swets is developing SwetsWise Selection Support

•Swets can help libraries in the manage and acquisition stage of the

customer subscription management process

•Swets strives to offer libraries and online platform to combine bibliographic

data, holdings, price information, usage statistics and impact factors

•Data analysis, creating scenario’s and generating reports


SwetsWise Selection Support Tool

Online platform combining bibliographic data, holdings, price information,

usage statistics, impact factors and citation data

•Customers can view their holdings and look for alternatives based on

classifications and who-bought-this-bought-that

•Customers can filter their holdings on e.g. low usage statistics, low

impact factors and high price per click

•Customers can create scenarios for decision-making to filter certain

categories of holdings. The scenarios will then calculate the impact on

the library budget

•Customers can create clear reports to present collection decisions and

to visualize the various options


The plans

First steps:

•Combining subscription data and usage statistics

•Usage statistics from ScholarlyStats

•Subscription data from Swets

•Result: price per use

Future development:

•Usage factor (project COUNTER)

•Expanding the online platform with other elements


Conclusions

•We are committed to providing our customers with the best acquisition

decision support we can possibly give

•Our commitment is shown by the recent acquisition of ScholarlyStats

•We believe Swets is in the right position, neutral to publishers and their

content, with already a wealth of information available to us


a clearer view of your usage statistics!

www.scholarlystats.comTina Feick

Vice President, Customer Relations1-800-645-6595

[email protected]

tina feick, vice president, swets november 1, 2007 niso usage data forum • dallas, tx

Documents