The document provides a history and overview of the Scan & Deliver service at Harvard College Library. It describes how the service was launched in 2009 to provide electronic delivery of book chapters and articles from the Harvard library collections. It details the growth of the service, improvements made based on user feedback, and efforts to continuously assess usage data and reporting to further enhance the patron experience.
Cloud computing, a concept that has leapt onto the scene in the last few years, is available to libraries in the form of hosted systems for an ILS or for e-resource access. These systems take advantage of cheaper computing power, increased availability of services such as Amazon Web services, and new development strategies from library vendors. What does moving library information to a networked environment do to improve the overall management of the system? How can libraries leverage cloud-hosted and managed collections? Are there tradeoffs in terms of local control? Learn the answers to these and related issues at this webinar where speakers will discuss actual cloud implementations in library environments.
This is a talk given by Jason Hoffman at a workshop given by Joyent called "Scale With Rails" in 2006. There's quite a bit of prescience in this presentation, including the first documented use of ZFS in production ("Fsck you if you think ZFS isn't production") and of OS-based virtualization (zones) in the cloud (which, it must be said, was not called "cloud" in 2006).
Digital technology has been adopted widely in the heritage sector for everything from kiosks to mobile web, apps, augmented reality, not to forget multimedia and audio guides. It holds out the promise of enabling sites to deliver information and interpretation to the visitor. But, to what extent are we in control of these tools?
Are we still flushed with excitement at the possibilities? Are we still caught up in thinking about the many ways digital technologies can meet our organisational objectives?
This presentation uses data from a series of projects to argue that we need to become more informed commissioners - considering visitor motivation, organisational mission and technological capabilities to achieve success.
Cloud computing, a concept that has leapt onto the scene in the last few years, is available to libraries in the form of hosted systems for an ILS or for e-resource access. These systems take advantage of cheaper computing power, increased availability of services such as Amazon Web services, and new development strategies from library vendors. What does moving library information to a networked environment do to improve the overall management of the system? How can libraries leverage cloud-hosted and managed collections? Are there tradeoffs in terms of local control? Learn the answers to these and related issues at this webinar where speakers will discuss actual cloud implementations in library environments.
This is a talk given by Jason Hoffman at a workshop given by Joyent called "Scale With Rails" in 2006. There's quite a bit of prescience in this presentation, including the first documented use of ZFS in production ("Fsck you if you think ZFS isn't production") and of OS-based virtualization (zones) in the cloud (which, it must be said, was not called "cloud" in 2006).
Digital technology has been adopted widely in the heritage sector for everything from kiosks to mobile web, apps, augmented reality, not to forget multimedia and audio guides. It holds out the promise of enabling sites to deliver information and interpretation to the visitor. But, to what extent are we in control of these tools?
Are we still flushed with excitement at the possibilities? Are we still caught up in thinking about the many ways digital technologies can meet our organisational objectives?
This presentation uses data from a series of projects to argue that we need to become more informed commissioners - considering visitor motivation, organisational mission and technological capabilities to achieve success.
This is the presentation I gave for my job interview on 5/8/12 at Yale University for my current position as Associate Director for Resource Sharing and Reserves.
Let It Go: How to Revise Your Resource Sharing Policies & Open Up Your Library Collections for ILL Lending, Presentation at the 2015 Connecticut Library Association Annual Conference.
Succession “Losers”: What Happens to Executives Passed Over for the CEO Job?
By David F. Larcker, Stephen A. Miles, and Brian Tayan
Stanford Closer Look Series
Overview:
Shareholders pay considerable attention to the choice of executive selected as the new CEO whenever a change in leadership takes place. However, without an inside look at the leading candidates to assume the CEO role, it is difficult for shareholders to tell whether the board has made the correct choice. In this Closer Look, we examine CEO succession events among the largest 100 companies over a ten-year period to determine what happens to the executives who were not selected (i.e., the “succession losers”) and how they perform relative to those who were selected (the “succession winners”).
We ask:
• Are the executives selected for the CEO role really better than those passed over?
• What are the implications for understanding the labor market for executive talent?
• Are differences in performance due to operating conditions or quality of available talent?
• Are boards better at identifying CEO talent than other research generally suggests?
Dorothy Atherton and Helen Adey from the Library Service at NTU spoke at a Talis Aspire Open Day in November 2012. These slides share the NTU experience of getting to 100% adoption of a reading-list service.
Web-Scale Discovery: Post ImplementationRachel Vacek
Discovery services provide users a single
search box to access a library’s entire prei-ndexed collection. Representatives from
two academic libraries serving different
user populations will discuss marketing,
instructing users, evaluating the product,
and maintaining the resource after a
discovery service is implemented
Why choose between presentations when you can come to one FEAST? Future & Emerging Access Services Trends (FEAST) gives you multiple speakers and topics in one 90 minute session. Hear practitioners and experts discuss what's new or just around the corner in circulation, shelving, reserves, interlibrary loan, offsite storage and more in short seven minute courses. Fresh and timely. Never frozen. There's always plenty to choose from at the FEAST!
LLAMA LOMS Program: Listening to the Customer: Using Assessment
Results to Make a Difference
ALA Annual (Chicago)
Sunday, July 11, 2009
Dr. Richard J. Moniz, Jr. (Johnson & Wales University)
This is the presentation I gave for my job interview on 5/8/12 at Yale University for my current position as Associate Director for Resource Sharing and Reserves.
Let It Go: How to Revise Your Resource Sharing Policies & Open Up Your Library Collections for ILL Lending, Presentation at the 2015 Connecticut Library Association Annual Conference.
Succession “Losers”: What Happens to Executives Passed Over for the CEO Job?
By David F. Larcker, Stephen A. Miles, and Brian Tayan
Stanford Closer Look Series
Overview:
Shareholders pay considerable attention to the choice of executive selected as the new CEO whenever a change in leadership takes place. However, without an inside look at the leading candidates to assume the CEO role, it is difficult for shareholders to tell whether the board has made the correct choice. In this Closer Look, we examine CEO succession events among the largest 100 companies over a ten-year period to determine what happens to the executives who were not selected (i.e., the “succession losers”) and how they perform relative to those who were selected (the “succession winners”).
We ask:
• Are the executives selected for the CEO role really better than those passed over?
• What are the implications for understanding the labor market for executive talent?
• Are differences in performance due to operating conditions or quality of available talent?
• Are boards better at identifying CEO talent than other research generally suggests?
Dorothy Atherton and Helen Adey from the Library Service at NTU spoke at a Talis Aspire Open Day in November 2012. These slides share the NTU experience of getting to 100% adoption of a reading-list service.
Web-Scale Discovery: Post ImplementationRachel Vacek
Discovery services provide users a single
search box to access a library’s entire prei-ndexed collection. Representatives from
two academic libraries serving different
user populations will discuss marketing,
instructing users, evaluating the product,
and maintaining the resource after a
discovery service is implemented
Why choose between presentations when you can come to one FEAST? Future & Emerging Access Services Trends (FEAST) gives you multiple speakers and topics in one 90 minute session. Hear practitioners and experts discuss what's new or just around the corner in circulation, shelving, reserves, interlibrary loan, offsite storage and more in short seven minute courses. Fresh and timely. Never frozen. There's always plenty to choose from at the FEAST!
LLAMA LOMS Program: Listening to the Customer: Using Assessment
Results to Make a Difference
ALA Annual (Chicago)
Sunday, July 11, 2009
Dr. Richard J. Moniz, Jr. (Johnson & Wales University)
This presentation was provided by Kyle Banerjee of Orbis Cascade Alliance, during the NISO event, "Library Resource Management Systems: New Challenges, New Opportunities," held October 8 - 9, 2009.
Developing & Running your own E-reader Seminars and Gadget LabsSarah Felkar
Presentation for the Netspeed 2012 Conference in Edmonton, AB.
Brief abstract: Often, one-on-one instruction is not the most efficient nor enjoyable
method of helping your staff or community learn more about technology. And as Ereaders, tablet computers, smartphones and other gadgets grow in number and type
library staff need to have ways of addressing questions about these devices.
Whether you are a highly tech-skilled library or feel a bit behind the times, this
hands-on workshop is designed to help you best serve your community’s needs.
This session will:
• Help you assess your staff or community’s needs
• Help you decide the best teaching option for each kind of audience or device
• Give you a working knowledge of a number of popular devices
• Suggest ways to evaluate your programs
• Give you an opportunity to discuss ideas and opportunities with other attendees
The Tale of Two Deployments: Greenfield and Monolith Apps with Docker Enterpr...Docker, Inc.
Docker use at Cornell University has been increasing steadily over the last 3 years in our central departments and various colleges - particularly as we move more workloads to the cloud. In this talk, we’ll give an overview of our Docker use cases across campus, featuring in detail two specific projects that highlight the versatility of this technology: Containerizing our central financial system (a traditional monolithic system); and building new researcher-focused financial tools natively in Docker (a microservice architecture built with the cloud in mind). We’ll discuss the design and implementation of both projects in detail. We’ll also describe how Docker has enabled us to develop consistent DevOps and CI practices spanning these two very different architectures.
Embracing GenAI - A Strategic ImperativePeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
Natural birth techniques - Mrs.Akanksha Trivedi Rama University
Creating the Service of Your Patrons' Dreams: A Short History of Scan & Deliver
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. The Simpsons On Patron Expectations
Agnes: And you, start over. I
want everything in one bag. Homer’s ILLiad
Pimple Faced Kid: Yes, ma'am!
Agnes: But I don't want the
bag to be heavy.
Pimple Faced Kid: I don't think
that's possible!
Agnes: What are you, the (Beware of Greeks bearing
possible police? Just do it! PDFs)
Simpson Safari, Season 12 Episode 17 (Airdate: April 1, 2001)
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. Overview
• History of the service – Project Planning,
Launch, Growing Pains, Assessment, Future
• How is Scan & Deliver like Angry Birds?
5. Overview Part 2- Meet The Data
• Sarah Tudesco-
(Re)building the
reporting workflows
• Meeting stakeholder
data needs
• Prioritizing & Building
reports
• Presenting the data
Disclaimer: Sarah is not an android, but
she is a wizard
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
10. Timeline
65 million 1636 2008 2009 2010 2011 2015
years ago
Dinosaurs Harvard ULC authorizes Launch! 1st DDO Hoverboards
roam 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. 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. 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. Project Planning Phase
• All participating units would
SAVE 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 weeks
SCAN A BOOK • Scan & Deliver links would
go live in OPAC on April 22,
2009 – Earth Day
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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!
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. 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. 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. 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!)
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. 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. Questions? Comments?
Tom Bruno
Head of Resource Sharing
Harvard College Library
617-496-7364
tbruno@fas.harvard.edu
IM: tcbruno2@yahoo.com
tom.bruno@gmail.com
33. • Step 1 – Asking
Scan and Deliver Statistics
Questions
5 steps to creating a robust program of
assessment and analysis. • Step 2 – Setting
Priorities
• Step 3 – Analyzing &
Building
• Step 4 – Presenting the
Data
• Step 5 – Feedback &
Continuous
Improvement
34. Step 1 – Asking Questions
• How many requests?
• Who is making requests?
• How much gets filled?
• What's 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.
36. 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?
38. Step 3 – Analyzing and Building
Core Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&Deliver
Requests Placed by Patrons
• Document Type = “Scan&Deliver” (Transactions)
• ChangedTo = “Submitted by Customer” (Tracking)
39. Step 3 – Analyzing and Building
Core Data Set: Data Table with all Scan&Deliver
Requests Filled by Participating Libraries
• Document Type = “Scan&Deliver” (Transactions)
• ChangedTo = “Delivered to Web”(Tracking)
40. 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.
41.
42. 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]
43. Step 4 – Presenting the Data
FY2012 Report: Requests Submitted 7/1/11 – 2/29/12 (Patron Group)
44.
45. 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).
47. 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
48. Questions? Comments?
Sarah Tudesco
Collection Management Analyst and Reporting
Librarian for Harvard College Library
617-495-2855
studesco@fas.harvard.edu
IM: studesco (Yahoo, Google Chat)
Editor's Notes
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: