Electronic Resources Management

1. Electronic Resources Management Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How? (not necessarily in that order) Andrew K. Pace Head, Systems NCSU Libraries

2. Acknowlegements • Greg Raschke and David Goldsmith • Nathan Robertson, and the DLF-ERMI • The entire “E-Matrix Team” at NCSU Libraries

3. What? • As libraries have worked to incorporate electronic resources into their collections, services and operations, most have found their existing Integrated Library Systems to lack important functionality to support these new resources. - Digital Library Federation Electronic Resource Management Initiative Report August 2004

4. Innovative Interfaces’ ERM Elsevier / Endeavor Meridian Ex Libris Verde CARL Goldrush VTLS VERIFY EBSCO Electronic Journal Service Sirsi ????? Various E-journal Finders DLF Electronic Resource Management Initiative Boston College Library California Digital Library Cornell University Emory University Griffith University Johns Hopkins Kansas State University MIT Penn State Tri-College Consortium UCLA University of Georgia University of Minnesota University of Washington Yale University Who? And Where? Vendor Efforts (aka “Me too”) Library Efforts DLF Electronic Resource Management Initiative Or Google=web hub

5. Goals Describe architectures needed to manage large collections of licensed e-resources Establish lists of elements and definitions Write and publish XML Schemas/DTDs Promote best practices and standards for data interchange Team Ivy Anderson (Harvard) Adam Chandler (Cornell University) Sharon E. Farb (UCLA) Timothy D. Jewell (Chair, University of Washington) Kimberly Parker (Yale) Angela Riggio (UCLA) Nathan D.M. Robertson (Johns Hopkins) DLF ERMI (Oct. 2002)

6. DLF ERMI Final Report, August 2004 • 46 pages of text • Describes the problem • Outlines existing solutions and efforts • Introduces the appendices. . . . • Appendix A: Functional Requirements • Appendix B: Workflow Diagram • Appendix C: Entity-Relationship Diagram (ERD) • Appendix D: Data Element Dictionary • Appendix E: Data Structure • Appendix F: XML Investigation

7. WHY?

8. Classic Integrated System MARC Records Patron Records Patron self-service WEBPAC circ transactions • websites (856) • e-books • e-journals • databases • datasets reserve records serial holdings item holdings SERIALS!!!! Serials Control Records Acquisitions Records

9. Dis-integrated Library System • Licensing Files • ILL Files • Collection Management Files • Helpdesk Files • Statistical Files alpha list of databases subject list of databases Library Portal web subject guides • websites (856) • e-books • e-journals • databases e-journal finder institutional repository TDNet Serials Solutions SFX Openly alert services Authentication & Authorization

10. NCSU Libraries E-Matrix • July 1999 – NCSU “E-Shepherding” specification written (and shelved) • 2000-2002 – the square peg and round hole era  “ERM” begins to emerge; DLIF-ERMI takes shape • Fall 2002 – electronic resources in the catalog; E-Journal Finder; SFX; Licensing database; Collection Management OASIS database E-Matrix begins to emerge

11. NCSU Libraries E-Matrix An ad hoc committee charge • The ad hoc E-Matrix Committee will implement a prototype electronic resources management system to support acquisition and licensing, collection management, and resource discovery for the Libraries' electronic resources [and all the print journals, too, please]

12. E-MATRIX ADMINISTRATIVE METADATA licensing I L S Data Repos- itories Website Catalog E-resources Alert Services Local DBs & Collections Digital Archives subscript-ion info statistics E-MATRIX DATA HOOKS PRESENTATION LAYER technical support remote access Other Databases: E-journal finder ETDs Instn’l Repository Etc. evaluative data Evaluative Tools vendor data

13. E-matrix Challenges • Public interface is secondary concern • Leveraging existing data—all of it! • Workflow, Workflow, Workflow • Avoid solutions looking for problem • Embrace the serial work

14. So what….

16. Title Format Available Location Applied Physics Electronic 1931 to pres. URL Print 1937 to pres. QC1 .P66, 6th floor stacks View full bound volume information View full record

17. Why, more generally • The E-Matrix Philosophy

18. E-Matrix Objectives Acquisitions manage electronic and print serial subscriptions, other e-resources, support licensing; local control Discovery anddisplay enhance access points; improve user displays; leverage local metadata; access at the work level CollectionManagement support resource selection, allocation, and evaluation; manage and use faculty-provided data; integrated data reports

19. Acquisitions • 19% of total collections budget spent on electronic resources • 28% of serials budget on e-resources • Still in a bi-model mode for many titles and divergent workflow is costly

20. Licensing • Systematically tracking terms and conditions of materials • Digital Rights Management (DRM) will govern use over fair use rights • Breach control will increase as vendor monitoring methods become more sophisticated

21. MyLibrary Patron Database MyTOCs MyAccount Collection Mgmt evaluative data SJERMs Journals / Serials Electronic Resources Databases My Courses Bib Data Acquisitions and licensing data Course Reserves Local subjects Statistical Data Search / Browse

22. “It’s the seriality, stupid”

23. Value Added Features • Integration with existing data stores • Direct faculty input and ranking • Serials integrated – simplified holdings • Complex bundle relationships • Localized evaluative data and usage reports • Local subjects and metadata

24. Finding Data Elements • Field Name • Field Type: text, number, date, dollar • Estimated field size: number of characters • Required field: y/n • Multiple occurrences: y/n • In ILS: y/n • Already stored electronically? (i.e. Access/Excell) • Field applies to: book, database, journal, all • Data entry by: cataloging, acquisitions, collmgmt • Example of data • Notes

25. Data Elements (~160) • Descriptive –Title, identifiers, provider, holdings (27) • Licensing – Parties, terms of use, rights, business terms (74) • Access – URI, authorization, proxy (10) • Administrative – Accounts, configuration, usage statistics, tech support, contact info (51) • Evaluative – Resource assessment, impact, faculty contact enrichment (20)

29. Collection Evaluation/Cost Analysis

31. Some expected (and unexpected) discoveries • Non-standard data ain’t so bad (SFX KB, acquisitions, serials, etc.) • Standard data ain’t as good as you think it is • There’s a reason no one has provided a definitive solution for expressing the “serial work” • ERM strongly suggests radical changes to technical services workflow • There’s as much data about data as there is data (at least it seems that way)

32. E-matrix / ERM Future • Taking the “E” out of E-matrix • Standards • Is the ILS superfluous? • Is MARC dead? • Will libraries or their vendors corner the ERM market? • Are we going to share the code? • Would we do it again? we must sure, what the heck sort of I can dream, can’t I? yes sort of definitely

33. Yes, we would do it again • The Serial Work • Migration of / Interoperability with existing data • Putting our development dollars where our collections dollars are

34. Building a Dirt Bike

35. Thank you. Andrew K. Pace Head, Systems North Carolina State University Libraries andrew_pace@ncsu.edu http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/staff/pace