13.30 qs3 mon steve sharp

1,076 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,076
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • In the past, evaluating usage of e-books was less important.After all, we had purchased them, and owned them in perpetuity, so we didn’t need to assess them, like journals, for retention or cancellation!But, PDA puts that in a whole new light.We need to assess e-books, not in terms of ‘retention’ but in terms of ‘commitment’ – i.e. do we continue to commit money to fund PDA activity. Is it worth it?
  • For most of us, COUNTER statistics form the backbone of our analysis.Books and Reference Works first included in 2006.
  • 2013 saw the implementation of COUNTER4, which brings together journals, databases, books into a single Code of Practice.Resource providers will need to be able to provide COUNTER4 statistics in order to call themselves COUNTER-compliant in future.What are becoming more important to us are the BR3 turnaway (“Access Denied”) reports.We want to see what our customers are trying to use, but being denied, so we can use that data to inform our purchasing decisions.
  • So far we have put around £150k into PDA. Nowhere else in our purchasing model would we dream of putting that amount of money into something without evaluating its value and ROI.First trial – 5 subject areas - £40kLaw, Philosophy, Psychology, Sociology, TheologySecond trial – 9 subject areas - £90k (but switched off after £65k)Business, Communications Studies, Education, English, History, Politics, Textiles, Medicine & HealthcareThird trial – 21 subject areas - £61.5kEnglish, History, Philosophy, Classics, Communications Studies, Design, Fine Art, Music, PCI, Education, Law, Politics, Sociology, Business, Medicine/Healthcare/Dentistry, Psychology, NHS, Biological Sciences, Physics.
  • What do you understand by ‘value’ and ‘impact’?At Last year’;s Conference, Karin Byström, (Uppsala University Library) outlined a project in which three Swedish university libraries – Uppsala, Malmö, and Södertörn – developed a PDA checklist for libraries.  Having come up with a nearly exhaustive checklist of questions, which would be a good starting point for any library tackling PDA for the first time, the group evaluated it against a number of vendors who would be familiar to UK librarians: Dawson, EBL, Ebrary, Ebsco, MyiLibrary.  Their recommendation was that libraries planning to start using PDA should be aware of the risks and opportunities in advance in order to maximize the advantages and avoid the biggest pitfalls. The checklist poses many questions designed to help libraries with this planning.But, print is still important!For non-STM researchers monographs remain important in establishing their status and they are still listed above articles in their bibliographies.  At the same time monograph purchasing power is falling even if the funds available are rising slightly. Books remain important for developing and communicating long arguments.  83% of scholars in the  humanities read their last book in print. But there is a mesh of digital information behind it. The print book is part of the digital chain.
  • The Dawsons PDA report allows us to monitor what we have purchased and how the e-books are being used.BUT, we have already purchased the e-books, so we are not looking at usage as a way of deciding whether to buy specific e-books, but whether to continue to put money into PDA as an activity.At Leeds, our concern was that this report (no matter how interesting), only showed us the titles we had purchased through PDA. What we really wanted to know was whether PDA titles were being used more or less that the individual e-book titles that we continued to purchase alongside our PDA activity.We talked to, and worked with Dawsons, giving them details of what we wanted to know, and they developed a report for us – the PDA Comparison Report – which has subsequently been rolled out as a standard report on the dawsonera platform.Obviously, we can’t claim complete responsibility for this report, as Dawsons were getting similar types of request from a number of other customers too, but the report does include all of our extensive list of requirements.
  • What does it show?Here it is just filtered by number of Online Reads, but you could total up all types of usage (Downloads, Rentals, Purchase Suggestions, etc) to rank your PDA e-books.BUT, we wanted more than that.We wanted to compare the usage of our PDA purchases with that for non-PDA purchases.
  • This is about working with our PDA supplier, to provide something we can count (usage data)And directly compare it with that for non-PDA purchases to see whether we are putting our money into the right business model.
  • As we use Dawsons as our main e-book provider, for both one-off purchasing and for PDA, this does give us a good comparison.Would be more difficult if you use a range of suppliers – would need equivalent data to enable comparison.We can see where and when we changed the purchasing trigger.
  • Here is the PDA Comparison Report, ranked by number of Online Reads.You could total all Online Reads, Downloads, etc, to give a single figure and rank by that?BUT, what this does show (albeit very simplistically) is that there are PDA titles starting to rank amongst our most heavily used e-books!
  • What we have also being using the data for is to look at the balance between PDA and non-PDA purchases.This is taken from an analysis of the first three months of this year.2169 dawsonera e-books have been purchased, of which 912 were purchasing via PDA.What we can then calculate is the percentage of each subjects e-books purchasing that was via PDA… but also the percentage of overall PDA spend by subject.If you take money from subject budgets to fund PDA< this could inform how you allocate funds in future.
  • 13.30 qs3 mon steve sharp

    1. 1. Good PDA or good PR? working with suppliers to evaluate the impact of PDA Steve Sharp Resource Acquisition Team Leader University of Leeds Library
    2. 2. COUNTER statistics (Release 1, 2006) • COUNTER Book Report 1: Number of Successful Title Requests by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 2: Number of Successful Section Requests by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 3: Turnaways by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 4: Turnaways by Month and Service • COUNTER Book Report 5: Total Searches and Sessions by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 6: Total Searches and Sessions by Month and Service
    3. 3. COUNTER4 (2013) • COUNTER Book Report 1: Number of Successful Title Requests by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 2: Number of Successful Section requests by Month and Title • COUNTER Book Report 3: Access Denied to Content Items by Month, Title and Category • COUNTER Book Report 4: Access Denied to Content Items by Month, Platform and Category • COUNTER Book Report 5: Total Searches by Month and Category
    4. 4. So why are we interested? Coverage Budget Purchases Funding model Trial 1 5 subject areas £40k 617 titles purchased Single fund Trial 2 9 subject areas £54k 1,151 titles purchased 9 subject funds Trial 3 21 subject areas £62k 912 titles (to date) Single fund
    5. 5. PDA report
    6. 6. • [Sample PDA Report]
    7. 7. PDA Comparison Report • Compares PDA purchases with non-PDA e-book purchases during the same period • Allows direct comparison of usage • Easy to see if PDA titles are used more/same/less than non-PDA purchases • Informs decisions about continued funding for PDA
    8. 8. • [Insert example of PDA Report here]
    9. 9. "If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together" (African proverb)
    10. 10. Steven Sharp s.l.sharp@leeds.ac.uk

    ×