Evidence-Based eBook Purchasing: Results and Implications from a Consortia-Publisher Initiative
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes576 views
This document summarizes a case study of a demand-driven acquisitions (DDA) program between the University of California system and CRC Press for engineering eBooks. The key points are: 1) The UC system had previously purchased CRC eBook archives but wanted to explore DDA to acquire new titles. They tested a DDA model for CRC's engineering eBook collection. 2) The DDA program was administered by the California Digital Library and gave all UC campuses access to newly published engineering eBooks. Titles that saw sufficient use were purchased for the system. 3) The initial results found that about 7% more titles were purchased than projected, showing the DDA program was an effective
Evidence-Based eBook Purchasing: Results and Implications from a Consortia-Publisher Initiative
- 1. Evidence-based Selection: A Case Study Julia Gelfand, University of California, Irvine Libraries Susan Sanders, Taylor & Francis Charleston Conference, 7 November 2014 1
- 2. Librarian’s Perspective Julia Gelfand, UCI ([email protected]) • Background – The University of California had a full archive of CRC eBooks from 2002-2012 with perpetual access • Campuses reviewed priorities • In 2013, selected 6 CRCnetBASES for Tier 2 access (5+ campuses participating) • In 2014, explored options for “demand driven acquisitions” (DDA) 2
- 3. More history…Acquiring engineering books from CRC Press • Largest collection of titles from CRC Press: CRCnetBASE’s (eBook platform) ENGnetBASE – 2310+ titles from 1999 in database • UC has 6 active & growing Schools of Engineering • Became test for DDA in 2013 ENGnetBASE CivilENGINEERINGnetBASE ElectricalENGINEERINGnetBASE GeneralENGINEERINGnetBASE IndustrialENGINEERINGnetBASE MechanicalENGINEERINGnetBASE MiningENGINEERINGnetBASE 3
- 4. Advantages • Administered by California Digital Library (CDL) unit of University of California • Added all new titles as released • Standard DDA procedures introduced – but no final decisions based on number of uses; title acquired for system-wide access by campuses’ review • Process engaged multiple colleagues & campuses in collection strategy • Did not force the same model for all CRCnetBASEs • Received MARC records to load in local catalogs through the UC shared cataloging program • Publisher knew what the minimum payout would be; CDL could budget accordingly 4
- 5. Decision-making process • Wanted to utilize the CRCnetBASE platform instead of via aggregator • Only wanted DRM free content • Wanted to make sure that users could search/find related yet relevant content • Wanted to share costs or distribute through the consortia members; keep unit costs reasonable • Reaffirms what DDA means – buy what we need at time of need 5
- 6. 6
- 7. Procedures in play • Defined goals with CRC Press • Worked closely with book vendor (YBP) & revised approval plan profiles – YBP receives content about netBASE placement from CRC • Concurrent users across campuses • Shared centralized cataloging distributed • If needed, print copies can be added • Year-end statistical analysis conducted by CDL 7
- 8. 8
- 9. 9
- 10. Year-End Analysis • Payment was made 2x/year to publisher determined by minimum spend • Titles added in last quarter rolled over – thus 16 month review • Factor analysis was 2.5x cost of title in print • Member libraries reviewed usage as provided by CRC • Usage did not always determine acquisition, but usually was a strong indicator • Statistical analysis also included anticipating value of content with no or low use • First year conclusion was about 7% more than projected 10
- 11. Lessons Learned Thus Far • Can add as many titles as needed • Entire consortium benefits from shared purchases & individual campus use • Particularly beneficial for release of large number of titles • Usage data very helpful • Still have to promote content in various ways • Experience can be scaled for analogous content • Have total flexibility • Makes financial sense – offers consortia full access 11
- 12. If we could do anything differently, what? • Have full cataloging records • Not have to conduct multiple reviews • Reduce publishing cycle for year-end • Better anticipate what ratio of title list will be added • Apply this model to other sister imprints of T&F & other eBook offers 12
- 14. An Evidence-Based Selection Model (EBS) • Standard aspects: • Publisher to provide MARCS, usage stats • Agreed-upon spend (no up-front deposit required in this case) • Access to content in a specific subject area • One calendar year term • Unique complications: • Shared ownership of purchased titles among all system member schools • Specific publication year only (as prior content was already owned by the system)
- 15. Things that helped • Existing customers • Users already used to having access to and using our content in this area • Less need to publicize to end users to promote discoverability, usage
- 16. Details, details… • How do we handle the need for a joint/parent account as well as individual school stats? • Is there any easy way to differentiate between usage of just these titles and the older titles already owned in this area? • How are we making sure that they get new MARCs in a timely fashion?
- 17. Clear Communication • Do support staff fully understand the details of the agreement? • Does everyone know specifically what their responsibilities are? • Does our billing department understand how/when we will be invoicing purchases? • Do we all understand how we define publication year? 17
- 18. Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) 18
- 19. Recognize when you need to change direction 19
- 20. Adjustments • Realized need to extend access period, in particular to allow 4th quarter publications time to be discovered and used • Extended amount of time content was accessible • Split into 2 orders: half by mid-December, remainder my mid-June of following year. 20
- 21. Takeaways • One size does not fit all; there are benefits to a mixed-bag approach to collection development • Continue to offer, and be open to, various means of purchase/access • EBP puts ever more importance on discoverability and usage statistics • Listen to your customers; work together 21
- 22. What’s Ahead? 22
- 23. Susan Sanders Account Manager – Western Region, eBooks and Digital Content (646) 379-4673 [email protected]
Editor's Notes
- #3: New beginnings – contractual arrangement changed going forward UC was engaging in more evidence-based metrics to determine collection priorities and best practices for investment This was a major change but the flexibility that CRC demonstrated in working with UC to achieve new methods of acquisitions and access encouraged the campuses to have multiple streams or methods of going forward for the content we needed. Campuses reviewed priorities – examined usage statistics, considered costs Other CRCnetBASEs: Chemistry (all – everything), Physics, Math, Environmental, Statistics, Biomedical,
- #5: Created opportunities for year-end review and campuses that wanted to buy additional titles could do so
- #6: platform – recently updated with Atypon functionality making it very user-friendly and utilitarian for positive reading & searching experience
- #8: Worked closely with book vendor (YBP) & revised approval plan profiles – standardized coverage for CRC content not included in UC/CDL’s netBASEs YBP received content from CRC – Reduce publishing cycle for year-end – always some titles that we have to take risks on because of release dates library customers can see what CRCnetBASE title is a part of and determine if not in one that UC/CDL has a license for, that they can select it; tied into approval plan notifications The multiplier was 5x for full campus distribution
- #12: Truly a model of pay when needed ; also blends subscription model with perpetual ownership ; Still have to promote content in various ways – searching for chapters like journal articles - Still have to promote content in various ways – pros/cons of different discovery methods
- #13: Sometimes cataloging records for DDA are abbreviated; Reduce publishing cycle for year-end – always some titles that we have to take risks on because of release dates