Creating the Service of Your Patrons’ Dreams     (a short history of Scan & Deliver)             Tom Bruno and Sarah Tudes...
The Simpsons On Patron ExpectationsAgnes: And you, start over. Iwant everything in one bag.                               ...
Guess What?• WE ARE THE POSSIBLE  POLICE!• Your job: figure out how to  Make It Happen without  breaking the law or your  ...
Overview• History of the service – Project Planning,  Launch, Growing Pains, Assessment, Future• How is Scan & Deliver lik...
Overview Part 2- Meet The Data                                           • Sarah Tudesco-                                 ...
Scan & Deliver Basic Facts             • Launched April 22nd, 2009             • 9 “Hub” libraries + 6 additional         ...
Discovery
Request (1:35pm Wednesday)
Delivery (8:21pm Wednesday)
Timeline65 million   1636      2008             2009      2010       2011    2015years agoDinosaurs    Harvard   ULC autho...
Origins• Before, ILL units used OCLC  as mechanism for  requesting/fulfilling article  requests• Cumbersome, negatively  i...
A New Mandate• University Library Council authorized the formation  of an Electronic Document Delivery project in 2008• Ea...
Project Planning Phase              • All participating units wouldSAVE A TREE     adopt ILLiad for resource              ...
Flies in the Ointment- #1• In Fall 2008 many  universities lost significant  amounts on their  endowments, including  Harv...
Flies in the Ointment- #2             • In February 2009 (less than               two months before               launch!)...
LAUNCH!• First request received was  from the Biblioteca  Berenson in Florence, Italy• Enabling remote access to  Harvard ...
Growing Pains       • Every year has seen double-         digit growth in request         volume over previous year       ...
User Assessment• In Fall 2010 Scan & Deliver  conducted extensive user  assessment of service• Short survey sent to all  r...
Assessment Findings          • Scan & Deliver had quickly            been incorporated into            curriculum support ...
Listening to the Patron #1• Initially 2 request/patron/day was a “hard”  limit – 3rd+ requests were queued for  processing...
Listening to the Patron #2• Patrons were routinely asking for Tables of  Contents, Index, Bibliography, Accompanying  Imag...
Have It Your Way
Listening to the Patron #3• Resends often unwittingly reproduced original  error, leading to patron frustration• New workf...
The Dreaded “C”-Word          • When service was            launched, our OGC said to            use Section 108 guideline...
Fair Use, Anyone?• Bottom Line: We could  probably fill a lot more than  we currently do• Huge potential benefit to  dista...
Assessment• Per unit cost studies  suggested economies of  scale made service feasible• Ongoing problems of cost at  small...
“We’re not doing it for the money…”
Your Mind. Blown.         Ask yourself:         1. HOW DO MY STATS            IMPACT MY            WORKFLOW?         2. HO...
Continuous Improvment Improvement         • Keeps users happy       • Keeps service relevant           • Empowers staff   ...
Scan & Deliver vs. Angry Birds• Launched in 2009                Today the world…• Wildly successful  beyond expectation• F...
Forward the Future         • HD ILL article scanning           pilot, Borrow Direct         • Campus book delivery        ...
Questions? Comments?Tom BrunoHead of Resource SharingHarvard College Library617-496-7364tbruno@fas.harvard.eduIM: tcbruno2...
• Step 1 – AskingScan and Deliver Statistics                                            Questions5 steps to creating a rob...
Step 1 – Asking Questions•   How many requests?•   Who is making requests?•   How much gets filled?•   Whats the turnaroun...
Step 2 – Setting Priorities• Patrons:  – How many patrons use the service?  – Which faculty or school are they associated ...
Step 3 – Analyzing and Building
Step 3 – Analyzing and BuildingCore Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&DeliverRequests Placed by Patrons  • Document Type ...
Step 3 – Analyzing and BuildingCore Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&DeliverRequests Filled by Participating Libraries  ...
Step 3 – Analyzing and Building                            Access Form: Input Dates –                            when ‘Run...
Step 4 – Presenting the Data             Who? How much do they want? What did they get?FY2012 Report: Requests Submitted 7...
Step 4 – Presenting the DataFY2012 Report: Requests Submitted 7/1/11 – 2/29/12 (Patron Group)
Scan & Deliver User Stats•   15,860 unique patrons since    service began in 2009•   Average Requests Per User: 9•   Most ...
Scan & Deliver: Request Stats• Requests: 141,797 / Deliveries: 107,685• Biggest Month (So Far): April 2011 – 5,532 Request...
Step 5 – Feedback & Process              Improvement• New workflows  – Do they impact the reporting data?• New questions  ...
Questions? Comments?Sarah TudescoCollection Management Analyst and Reporting  Librarian for Harvard College Library617-495...
Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver
Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver
Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver

375 views
270 views

Published on

A presentation about Harvard Library's Scan & Deliver service by Tom Bruno and Sarah Tudesco.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
375
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I was going to call this 5 easy steps to a robust program of assessment and analysis – but I can’t honestly say any of this is easy. However, I can say that it’s worth it!
  • Since we were starting from scratch, we wanted to make sure the data and reports we would develop would answer the questions asked by the stakeholders.  Here was our initial list of questions:
  • Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver

    1. 1. Creating the Service of Your Patrons’ Dreams (a short history of Scan & Deliver) Tom Bruno and Sarah Tudesco Harvard College Library 6/8/12
    2. 2. The Simpsons On Patron ExpectationsAgnes: And you, start over. Iwant everything in one bag. Homer’s ILLiadPimple Faced Kid: Yes, maam!Agnes: But I dont want thebag to be heavy.Pimple Faced Kid: I dont thinkthats possible!Agnes: What are you, the (Beware of Greeks bearingpossible police? Just do it! PDFs)Simpson Safari, Season 12 Episode 17 (Airdate: April 1, 2001)
    3. 3. Guess What?• WE ARE THE POSSIBLE POLICE!• Your job: figure out how to Make It Happen without breaking the law or your budget• User engagement + data assessment + continuous improvement = making yourself indispensable, therefore JP Porcaro, Patron Saint of Making It Happen Awesome (LJ 2012 Mover & shaker)
    4. 4. Overview• History of the service – Project Planning, Launch, Growing Pains, Assessment, Future• How is Scan & Deliver like Angry Birds?
    5. 5. Overview Part 2- Meet The Data • Sarah Tudesco- (Re)building the reporting workflows • Meeting stakeholder data needs • Prioritizing & Building reports • Presenting the dataDisclaimer: Sarah is not an android, butshe is a wizard
    6. 6. Scan & Deliver Basic Facts • Launched April 22nd, 2009 • 9 “Hub” libraries + 6 additional participating collections • Dumbarton Oaks added in 2011, new collections TBA • Open to current faculty, students, and staff • No charge- 2 request/patron/business day • 4 business-day turnaround
    7. 7. Discovery
    8. 8. Request (1:35pm Wednesday)
    9. 9. Delivery (8:21pm Wednesday)
    10. 10. Timeline65 million 1636 2008 2009 2010 2011 2015years agoDinosaurs Harvard ULC authorizes Launch! 1st DDO Hoverboardsroam Earth Founded S&D service Assessment added NOTE: Time axis should be read from left to right only, unless you own a TARDIS or a DeLorean
    11. 11. Origins• Before, ILL units used OCLC as mechanism for requesting/fulfilling article requests• Cumbersome, negatively impacted ILL operations, patron confusion about what items/collections were eligible, what were not• Short-lived scanning pilot at HD proved too costly to implement permanently
    12. 12. A New Mandate• University Library Council authorized the formation of an Electronic Document Delivery project in 2008• Each school would be represented, ensuring 100% coverage of eligible Harvard Library patrons• Harvard Library’s first “shared service,” requiring unprecedented coordination and cooperation across previously independent entities (a.k.a. “tubs”)• Before S&D, think of Harvard Libraries as a consortium of 70+ libraries
    13. 13. Project Planning Phase • All participating units wouldSAVE A TREE adopt ILLiad for resource sharing operations • Existing ILLiad units (i.e., HMS, HVL, HLS) would be merged into shared hosted server • New units would be brought online at staggered intervals of 1-2 weeksSCAN A BOOK • Scan & Deliver links would go live in OPAC on April 22, 2009 – Earth Day
    14. 14. Flies in the Ointment- #1• In Fall 2008 many universities lost significant amounts on their endowments, including Harvard• Questions arose about wisdom of adding an ambitious new library service at this time “Brother, can you spare a billion?”• Mandate was sent back to ULC and was reaffirmed unanimously
    15. 15. Flies in the Ointment- #2 • In February 2009 (less than two months before launch!), we realized our workflow would not work as proposed • A staff-mediated workaround was developed, documented, and communicated • Lesson Learned: Make sure your project has the right combination of stakeholders!
    16. 16. LAUNCH!• First request received was from the Biblioteca Berenson in Florence, Italy• Enabling remote access to Harvard Library patrons overseas has been a huge selling point for the service• One graduate student in China was able to complete her dissertation without having to return to the United States to access the library collection
    17. 17. Growing Pains • Every year has seen double- digit growth in request volume over previous year • At HCL, request volume exceeded capacity of our resource sharing unit • New cross-divisional workflow established to meet demand • Service Level Agreement defined each division’s responsibilities and expectations
    18. 18. User Assessment• In Fall 2010 Scan & Deliver conducted extensive user assessment of service• Short survey sent to all recent users via an email link• Focus Groups asked patrons from four select groups (Faculty, Grad Students, Undergrads, Staff) to share impressions of service
    19. 19. Assessment Findings • Scan & Deliver had quickly been incorporated into curriculum support role • Service worked well with “just in time” research methods • Patrons wanted more microform eligibility, OCR- ready PDFs • Wide misunderstanding of how copyright operated
    20. 20. Listening to the Patron #1• Initially 2 request/patron/day was a “hard” limit – 3rd+ requests were queued for processing next day• Managing this quickly became a nightmare• Our solution: treat request limits as “Service Minimums” – process them if there was capacity• Hypothetical abuse was impacting actual service
    21. 21. Listening to the Patron #2• Patrons were routinely asking for Tables of Contents, Index, Bibliography, Accompanying Images/Plates, and Title & Verso pages – no standard form of entry• Modified request forms so that these “menu options” could be selected via checkboxes, appear in unused CitedIn fields• Less cut & paste for staff, more transparent and reliable for patrons!
    22. 22. Have It Your Way
    23. 23. Listening to the Patron #3• Resends often unwittingly reproduced original error, leading to patron frustration• New workflow where resend requests went to different scanning unit, staff mediation if needed – 24-hour turnaround on resends• The Takeaway: If you’re going to adopt a high- performance workflow, you need to adopt a “high touch” troubleshooting workflow to keep your patrons happy
    24. 24. The Dreaded “C”-Word • When service was launched, our OGC said to use Section 108 guidelines • Poor fit when scanning our material for our own patrons • Closest analogy= Reserves, but that’s for entire classes, not individuals • Using S&D scans for curriculum support further complicates this
    25. 25. Fair Use, Anyone?• Bottom Line: We could probably fill a lot more than we currently do• Huge potential benefit to distance students, faculty abroad, preservation of originals• Anyone want to get sued so we know exactly how much?• Our solution: central oversight removes burden from local units
    26. 26. Assessment• Per unit cost studies suggested economies of scale made service feasible• Ongoing problems of cost at smaller units and HD, where labor primarily performed by staff, not students• Development of “success Library Science Dog metrics” to evaluate services (Don’t Try This At Home!)
    27. 27. “We’re not doing it for the money…”
    28. 28. Your Mind. Blown. Ask yourself: 1. HOW DO MY STATS IMPACT MY WORKFLOW? 2. HOW DOES MY WORKFLOW IMPACT MY STATS? 3. RINSE & REPEAT
    29. 29. Continuous Improvment Improvement • Keeps users happy • Keeps service relevant • Empowers staff • Encourages buy-in
    30. 30. Scan & Deliver vs. Angry Birds• Launched in 2009 Today the world…• Wildly successful beyond expectation• Fulfilled previously unacknowledged need• Iterative development- new features, new levels (i.e., collections) being added …tomorrow the universe!• Totally addictive
    31. 31. Forward the Future • HD ILL article scanning pilot, Borrow Direct • Campus book delivery • Adding more collections, automation • Better integration with e-reserves, Ares? • Collaboration with preservation to save public domain scans
    32. 32. Questions? Comments?Tom BrunoHead of Resource SharingHarvard College Library617-496-7364tbruno@fas.harvard.eduIM: tcbruno2@yahoo.com tom.bruno@gmail.com
    33. 33. • Step 1 – AskingScan and Deliver Statistics Questions5 steps to creating a robust program ofassessment and analysis. • Step 2 – Setting Priorities • Step 3 – Analyzing & Building • Step 4 – Presenting the Data • Step 5 – Feedback & Continuous Improvement
    34. 34. Step 1 – Asking Questions• How many requests?• Who is making requests?• How much gets filled?• Whats the turnaround from request to delivery?• Are we meeting the service agreements?• How many requests are unfilled?• How many requests get routed to ILL?• Who is filling the requests?• How are people using the service?• Are people satisfied with the service?
    35. 35. Step 2 – Setting Priorities• Patrons: – How many patrons use the service? – Which faculty or school are they associated with (Law, Medicine, Faculty of Arts & Sciences)? – What is their role at the University (student – undergraduate and graduate, faculty, staff, other)?• Requests: – How many Scan & Deliver requests placed daily, weekly, monthly? – How many requests were filled? By which school?
    36. 36. Step 3 – Analyzing and Building
    37. 37. Step 3 – Analyzing and BuildingCore Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&DeliverRequests Placed by Patrons • Document Type = “Scan&Deliver” (Transactions) • ChangedTo = “Submitted by Customer” (Tracking)
    38. 38. Step 3 – Analyzing and BuildingCore Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&DeliverRequests Filled by Participating Libraries • Document Type = “Scan&Deliver” (Transactions) • ChangedTo = “Delivered to Web”(Tracking)
    39. 39. Step 3 – Analyzing and Building Access Form: Input Dates – when ‘Run Reports’ is clicked, an Access Macro runs in the background and builds reporting tables. Access Form: Download Report Data, form displays the dates in the current available reporting table and user can download data for requests, users, and cancellations.
    40. 40. Step 4 – Presenting the Data Who? How much do they want? What did they get?FY2012 Report: Requests Submitted 7/1/11 – 2/29/12 [Screen Shots from Excel Spreadsheet]
    41. 41. Step 4 – Presenting the DataFY2012 Report: Requests Submitted 7/1/11 – 2/29/12 (Patron Group)
    42. 42. Scan & Deliver User Stats• 15,860 unique patrons since service began in 2009• Average Requests Per User: 9• Most Requests: 1,807 by a Graduate Student• 36% of our patrons make a single request• Graduate Students are our biggest customer (42% of all requests placed).
    43. 43. Scan & Deliver: Request Stats• Requests: 141,797 / Deliveries: 107,685• Biggest Month (So Far): April 2011 – 5,532 Requests, 4,393 Deliveries
    44. 44. Step 5 – Feedback & Process Improvement• New workflows – Do they impact the reporting data?• New questions – Can the existing reporting data answer the question? – What about other resource sharing services (Borrow Direct? Interlibrary Loan?)• Improving existing data – Make the data clear to a wider audience
    45. 45. Questions? Comments?Sarah TudescoCollection Management Analyst and Reporting Librarian for Harvard College Library617-495-2855studesco@fas.harvard.eduIM: studesco (Yahoo, Google Chat)

    ×