[Mcls-print-storage] Retention Lists Redux

[Rick Lugg]

Hello all,

 

We at SCS have continued to think about the retention commitments issue, and
have a few new comments for your consideration:

 

1.       Andy prepared the attached very simple graph this weekend. I think
everyone will find it interesting.

 

2.       You'll note that the thinking about retention commitments has been
selective. That is, the group wanted title-specific retention lists for
those cases where we were drawing down the number of holdings to 2. However,
there remain an almost equal number of titles that already showed 2
holdings. Since we took no action on these, there are no formal retention
commitments for another 884,000 title-holdings with characteristics
identical to the 736,000 already assigned.

 

3.       Similarly, for uniquely-held titles, we took no action in cases
where there were fewer than  50 copies in the US or where no Hathi version
existed. That leaves another 1,098,000 titles without explicit retention
commitments.

 

4.       There are 277,000 titles which were held by 3-7 libraries and were
exempted from withdrawal either because of high circulation or because they
were published in 2005 or later. No retention assignments were made for
these, either.

 

5.       This suggests a couple of things:

 

a.       Maybe we are acting prematurely on a too-specific subset of the
group's collective collection. Any retention policy developed would
ultimately need to account for these other cases.

 

b.      One approach would be to keep the currently-assigned retention
commitments informal for the next couple of years. As previously agreed,
pilot libraries would withdraw only from the authorized lists, but would not
yet commit to the 25-year retention of low-circulation items. Instead, wait
for the next round of analysis. By the time the group is expanded in 2014, a
retention policy could be developed and new allocations established across
the entire membership. Only at that time would formal, long-term retention
commitments be established-amortized more fully across the final membership
of the group, and shaped by 2 additional years of use and overlap data.

 

This would dramatically simplify the situation, enabling progress on agreed
withdrawals, and conscious inaction on the retention lists. A strategic
delay of this sort would allow more time for definition of retention
requirements, evolution of MARC 583 practice, and ultimately would focus
retention on high-use and unique items, along with the titles where 2
holdings remain. It should also enable retention to be prioritized and
shared more fully. 

 

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 <http://www.sustainablecollections.com/>  

 

blog:  Sample  <http://sampleandhold-r2.blogspot.com/> & Hold

 

twitter:   @ricklugg 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mlcnet.org/mailman/private/mcls-print-storage/attachments/20120319/b52ab78c/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCLS-Summary-Graphics-V1.pptx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
Size: 70777 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mlcnet.org/mailman/private/mcls-print-storage/attachments/20120319/b52ab78c/MCLS-Summary-Graphics-V1-0001.bin