• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
ERM IG - ALA 2012 - Speaking Points
 

ERM IG - ALA 2012 - Speaking Points

on

  • 349 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
349
Views on SlideShare
349
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    ERM IG - ALA 2012 - Speaking Points ERM IG - ALA 2012 - Speaking Points Document Transcript

    • Electronic Resources Management Interest GroupSaturday, June 23, 2012 - 4:00pm to 5:30pmThis session of the ERM Interest Group focuses on the role that library initiated ERMS continue to play inthe ERM marketplace. Major developments are taking place with the focus on ILS and ERM integration insystems such as ExLibris’ ALMA, Innovative’s Sierra and the Kuali OLE project but many libraries stillchoose to develop their own ERMS or turn to solutions created and offered by other libraries such asCUFTS, CORAL, ERMes and Gold Rush. This session includes presentations from representatives of theselibrary initiated ERMS and will highlight the value and impact that these systems continue to have on theERMS marketplace both now and in the future.Text ImagesGood afternoon!I’m delighted to be here with you all; manythanks to Benjamin Heet and the ERM IG for theinvitation to join this panel, and the opportunityto explore this question of…Why library-initiated ERMS during a time ofnext gen commercial ILS systems such as Almaand Sierra?To get started, I’ll share who I am…While at the University of Wisconsin – LaCrosse, I co-developed ERMes with WilliamDoering, Metadata and Document DeliveryLibrarian.ERMes is a library-developed ERM designed forsmall to medium libraries that functions in MSAccess that is used by over 60 libraries fromaround the world.Now, I am at the University of Connecticutwhere I am at the beginning stages ofimplementing CORAL – another library-initiatedERM that better suites a large library such as
    • UConn’s.So, why library-created ERMS? 1. Access to and ERMS in the first place. 2. Flexibility. 3. Integration.Let’s start with access to an ERMS.
    • We know that libraries are spending hugeamounts of their budgets on e-content.According to the National Center for EducationStatistics, 70% of serials expenditures in 2010were on e-subscriptions/content.At UConn this most recent fiscal year – FY12 –88% of our collections budget is spent on e-content: e-books, e-serials, e-media/streamingvideo, and aggregate databases.Here’s the NCES data again in dollars instead ofpercentages.A huge amount of money on content that nodoubt needs managing.At UConn, it looks like there will not be a budgetincrease for library collections this year. This is afamiliar story as libraries continue to strugglejust to maintain content, let alone pay for thenecessary systems to manage it.Consider Springfield Technical CommunityCollege…Enrollment: 6,782Library Staff: 14Approx 78 Aggregate DatabsesThey are using ERMes to manage their e-resources, and while ERMes is not the mostrobust ERM, it is perfect for Springfield AreaCommunity Colleges because they are small incollections and have a shoestring staff, but theyhave MS Access.This is a library that – unless federal and studentfunding experiences a miraculous,unprecedented shift towards education andlibraries, is always going to need access tosimple and free ERM.
    • And Springfield isn’t alone…See how the funds expended on e-resources perFTE drops dramatically by school size?Now, let’s talk about flexibility and integration…Why library initiated?FelxibilityI would venture to say that changes in andcomplexities of e-resource management areoccurring faster than other library processeshoused in an ILS.Thus the idea of a flexible ERM isn’t a niceoption, it’s mandatory. - Journal Packages + Reconciliations o Annual - Aggregate Databases o Annual - One Time Purchases o One time w/ various options for payment - Budget changes; new tracking methodologies - E-Books o Purchases, subscriptions, PDATo date, commercial systems and large systemssimply take longer to change.
    • Whereas in a stand-alone ERM, changes can bemade quickly without jeopardizing workflow.For example, in ERMes, a user can add or edit afield in a few minutes and then continue on – achange in the system is a mere pause ratherthan a traffic jam.Users need access to the e-resources, ERMlibraries need a functioning system tomanage/provide access to these e-resoruces.We need the salt, not the most perfectlydesigned salt shaker.We need something like Lincoln Logs or Legos;pieces that allow us to tweak our systemconstantly as we go.IntegrationAnd to some degree libraries have this…Because libraries are full of independentsystems right now – ILS, Illiad, etc. You could saythat libraries are full of kits to build informationaccess; you know like a set of Lincoln Logs or aset of Legos.However, if we consider library-initiated ERMSand use a bit of imagination….Then, along with flexibility, library-initiatedERMS also afford some amazing possibilities forintegrating with other systems – thus gainingfunctionality without losing flexibility.
    • Example: Potential for CORAL to integrate withgoKB which integrates with Kuali Ole.Then, we get Lincoln Logs AND Legos.With library-initiated ERMS, it’s like haveseparate nimble systems with a built in adapterkit that allows not just Lincoln Logs and Logos,but how about Duplos and Tinker Toys too?There are already some separate librarysystems that integrate with one another – notnecessarily perfectly – but are amazing from theuser’s perspective.For example, Open URL link resolvers and Illiad.Each separate system is maximized for it’sunique function but integrates with the other.So, in the end it’s not about big box systems formanaging library resources; it’s about systemsthat work well but are open, flexible, and caninterweave with other open flexible systems.It’s about amazing potential for constructing animpressive architecture of informationmanagement and access, that can bedeconstructed and rebuiltquickly by libraries toaccommodate that only known constant:change.