[Mcls-print-storage] SCS Data Error

[Barbara J Cockrell]

All, I like Julie's suggestion about thinking about 3 or fewer circs. at an individual library. Here's another take on that. There are probably titles that have circulated rarely or never in my library that may have circulated multiple times at another library. I'd like to know about those items and weed them out of our library if the library at which an item has circulated is willing to keep that title. Under our current rules these items aren't flagged as deselection candidates (since they circulate more than 3 times among all the libraries). Could they be identified? Barbara Dr Barbara Cockrell, Associate Dean for Collections & Technical Services, University Libraries, Western Michigan University, 1903, W. Michigan Ave, Kalamazoo, MI 49008-5353 phone 269-387-5143 fax 269-387-5077 'University Libraries: a recognized essential partner in enriching and elevating all aspects of scholarship at WMU' ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julie Garrison" <garrisoj at gvsu.edu>
> To: "Rick Lugg" <rick at r2consulting.org>, mcls-print-storage at mcls.org
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:48:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [Mcls-print-storage] SCS Data Error
> Hi Rick,
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention so quickly. My first
> reaction when I read this was OUCH!!! And then I started thinking….
> maybe this is an opportunity to really make sure we know what numbers
> are important to us.
> Looking at only three circulations across seven libraries, means that
> it circulated at fewer than half of your libraries (if we all own the
> item) in the past 11 years. That isn't a very compelling number. What
> if we thought about circulations in terms of individual libraries
> instead (and forgive me SCS is I'm creating a nightmare situation
> here). What if we looked at how many titles we have 3 or more copies
> of across our libraries that has circulated NO MORE than three times
> at ANY given library? So, we aren't concerned with overall circulation
> as much as we are with low circulation across libraries? Does this
> make sense?
> Secondly, this is a pilot to learn and understand our overlap. Is it
> possible that we don't have a large enough overlap to move forward
> without considering ways to expand the group? Do we need SCS to
> develop some proposals for how we could add libraries to our group and
> expand our number of titles? Of course we would also be sharing the
> titles available for deselection with a greater number of libraries,
> so am not sure overall how that will increase our numbers.
> Those are my initial thoughts to get the ball rolling in considering
> our new reality.
> Julie
> Julie Garrison
> Associate Dean, Research and Instructional Services
> Grand Valley State University
> 204 JHZ, 1 Campus Drive
> Allendale, MI 49401
> 616-331-3636
> garrisoj at gvsu.edu
> From: Rick Lugg < rick at r2consulting.org >
> Organization: R2 Consulting LLC
> Reply-To: Rick Lugg < rick at r2consulting.org >
> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:45:42 -0500
> To: < mcls-print-storage at mcls.org >
> Subject: [Mcls-print-storage] SCS Data Error
> Hello everyone,
> I regret to announce that we have uncovered a fundamental problem in
> our calculation of the MCLS shared print opportunity. In applying the
> circulation criteria of “3 or fewer charges” we inadvertently pulled
> that data from individual library tables rather than from aggregated
> circulation activity. As a result, SCS initially identified 743,347
> shared withdrawal candidates. Once we substitute the correct data, the
> new result is 265,770 titles. Obviously, this changes the picture
> significantly. On behalf of all of us at SCS, I am very sorry for this
> mistake, and we will do everything possible to rectify it. What we
> can’t do, of course, is change the reality of the situation – that
> there are substantially fewer titles that meet the current criteria
> than originally expected. But we will consider and estimate the effect
> of other scenarios, and will help MCLS to find its desired balance
> between collection security and responsible withdrawal.
> One example: if circulation criteria were adjusted to “5 or fewer
> charges” (over 11 years and across 7 libraries), with all other
> criteria remaining unchanged, 354,386 withdrawal candidates would
> result. That might be a middle way forward. SCS has some other
> thoughts about supplementary strategies, but none will return us to
> the previously projected numbers of withdrawal candidates. Now that
> our error has been corrected, we can only honor the data. The
> opportunity is only as large as the criteria and the data permit. Once
> we have a new base number for shared withdrawal candidates, we can use
> the same approach to allocating them across the group as agreed last
> week. But ultimately everyone’s numbers will be lower.
> Please note that this does not affect uniquely-held titles. The
> associated withdrawal candidate lists sent last week by Andy remain
> valid and actionable. That work can begin at any time.
> Clearly, we need to discuss this before the next regularly-scheduled
> conference call. Randy, do you want to set up a Doodle poll to find a
> time – or shall I? If wanted, we can provide numbers on allocations to
> individual libraries under both the “3 or fewer” and “5 or fewer”
> aggregate circulations. We recognize that we need to keep moving
> steadily, as some libraries have immediate space needs.
> Once again, we deeply regret our mistake and the consequent
> overstatement of opportunity. If you could have seen our faces when we
> realized our error... But we are glad we caught it now and can correct
> it before producing lists or removing books. We will continue to work
> with MCLS to refine and validate all of the elements of this
> ground-breaking project.
> Thanks, and best regards,
> Rick
> Rick Lugg
> Sustainable Collection Services LLC
> 63 Woodwell’s Garrison
> Contoocook, NH 03229
> rick at sustainablecollections.com
> p. 603-746-5991
> f. 603-746-6052
> www.sustainablecollections.com
> blog: Sample & Hold
> twitter: @ricklugg
> _______________________________________________ Mcls-print-storage
> mailing list Mcls-print-storage at lists.mlcnet.org
> http://lists.mlcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/mcls-print-storage
> _______________________________________________
> Mcls-print-storage mailing list
> Mcls-print-storage at lists.mlcnet.org
> http://lists.mlcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/mcls-print-storage
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mlcnet.org/mailman/private/mcls-print-storage/attachments/20120117/be64207c/attachment.html