1 / 21

Proving its worth . . .

Proving its worth. British Library Bill Hubbard 21 January 2008. Leading questions. How much money will it save? The point of this is to allow us to cancel journals, right? Where will the money come from? The money will have to come from library budgets . . .

marietta-anglim
Download Presentation

Proving its worth . . .

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proving its worth . . . British Library Bill Hubbard 21 January 2008

  2. Leading questions . . . • How much money will it save? • The point of this is to allow us to cancel journals, right? • Where will the money come from? • The money will have to come from library budgets . . . • When will the repository break even? or even . . . • How much money will it make?

  3. No summary answers . . . • Reasonable questions about cost, value-for-money, sources of money • Reasonable answers about open access, added-value and benefits • Our job to bring the two perspectives together • Let us try a traditional Cost-Benefit analysis . . .

  4. Cost - Benefit analysis • Cost • Benefit

  5. Cost - Benefit analysis • Cost • Software • Server • FTE staffing • Distributed tech maintenance • Cultural change • New staff • Role redefinition • Service development • Permanent budget line • Benefit • open access • information management • citation rise

  6. Costs are material, benefits strategic • Repositories are a strategic investment • Repositories have to be gauged on strategic grounds • Are there any comparisons?

  7. Comparisons • Any university information system • Website • Portal • Timetabling system • Finance system • Personnel database • Library catalogue • e-learning environment • email

  8. Proving the worth of email . . . • Similarities - a system already in place • postal service, telephones - secretaries, services, hierarchies • Benefits echoed • personalised communication - peer-to-peer direct contact - desktop access • Cultural change echoes • roles redefined • Adoption profile • discipline specific - slow-build to tidal wave

  9. and in passing . . . • email has not replaced postal service • although monolithic commercial concerns are strained • embedded monopoly position • agile operators move into vacuum • Social mores insist on some postal communication for some purposes • Similar ideas of “official” communication • New generations may have other ideas

  10. Proving the worth of email . . . • Can a similar calculation be made?

  11. So, alternatively . . . • What do we loose if we don’t develop a repository service? • Who will be disadvantaged if we stop repository development? • How much will it cost if we don’t have a repository in the future? • What is the current situation costing us right now?

  12. Strategic value • Show relevance to stakeholder needs • Show relevance to stakeholder aspirations • Show an account for stakeholder concerns • Identify any short-term returns • Describe long-term benefits, added value • Quantify costs without undercutting true investment • Create practical metrics to see if investment is on course • but measure the right thing!

  13. Stakeholder needs and aspirations • Information management • Research management • Assessment and RAE • Institutional profile • Personal profiles • Marketing and publicity • Competitor parity • Show how repository addresses these in local and national context

  14. Account for stakeholder concerns • IPR - institutional and academic • Academics’ freedom to publish • Library roles under redefinition

  15. Short-term returns • Funding agency requirements • Citation improvements • OA citations rise • but rise is relative between academics, departments, institutions, so need to keep up with the Joneses

  16. Long-term benefits, added value • Information management • Research management • Assessment and RAE • Institutional profile • Personal profiles • Marketing and publicity

  17. Quantify costs • Staff • Equipment • Maintenance • Content acquisition • Support • Advocacy • Distributing the cost - embedding the process

  18. Practical metrics • Defining your own metrics for success • These will be locally sensitive • Collection policies • Collection targets - be practical • By discipline? - by research income? - by prominence? • Private metrics for failure • for the warning bells to sound for you first!

  19. Some figures for context • 4000 articles per year • 200 working days • 20 articles a day • target for collection? • and preprints, conference papers, book chapters, reports, data-sets . . .

  20. Proving its worth . . . • Not through a balance sheet • Not through coarse measures of size • Not as replacement for anything • As strategic investment that improves institution’s core work • As response to contemporary developments in HE and research • As beneficial for research management and research outputs

  21. Bill Hubbard bill.hubbard@nottingham.ac.uk

More Related