This is the second half of the post on collection management metrics, where we complete the set of 10 important ways to measure the value and ROI of your library collection.
Interlibrary loan (ILL) statistics – What content are you lending and what content are you borrowing? ILL has become a crucial addition to any institution’s collection. However, a detailed analysis of the numbers and the actual content being borrowed and lent may highlight some big gaps in your own collection that could be substituted for content that is being lent more than it is being used by your own end-users.
Internal requests – Monitoring and recording internal requests for journals and books (eBooks included of course), gives a very clear picture of where gaps may exist in your collection, or where new content has emerged and generated a new need. If this information is gathered in a systematic way, interesting patterns can emerge over longer time periods which could be addressed by adjusting the balance of spend across departments.
Access denied reports – Publishers often hold onto this information, but it’s hard to see why they would not want to share it following a request from a library customer (upselling opportunities abound!). However, knowing what content users are trying to get to, and to which you don’t subscribe, can also demonstrate another level of gap-filling that your internal requests have already initiated. COUNTER lists some standard reports that deal with access denied (or bounceback) data for journals and books in the latest version of their Code of Practice document (see: Journal Report 2, Books reports 3 & 4, and Title Report 2).
Repository usage – While this metric is usually focussed on content generated within the same institution/organisation, it is nevertheless part of the overall collection so it is important to be able to measure and report on the effectiveness of a repository as a vehicle for delivering that content to end-users. Depending on what the original objective for the repository is, you can adjust the way it is made available externally, updating user interfaces and so on, by analysing the underlying data. Repository record usage is the primary metric you should be concerned with but you can also apply standard web analytics tools such as Google Analytics, which can sync with repository platforms such as DSpace. This will show you internal and external event tracking, informing you on internal and external outreach efforts concerning the repository. If you intend for your repository material to be found and utilized by external parties, a good set of web analytics will also help your search engine optimization efforts to build the profile (and ranking) of the repository in Google and other search engines.
Number of publications – The final metric that you should be taking into consideration when building this complete picture of your library collection is what researchers are writing and where they are being published. This will outline some of the most important or relevant journals, books and other content types for their subject area, giving you a solid picture of where the collection should extend to.
Managing a library collection is of great importance, not only to manage limited budgets and staff time but also to meet the learning needs of the end-user. Ultimately, these tie into the objectives of the institution or organization as a whole. We hope the list above is a good reference guide which you can use to assess the relevance of metrics or to undertake a systematic review of library collection materials.
Part II: 10 metrics you should be using to evaluate your library collection
29 mrt 2013 Filed under: Selection ManagementThe other 5 metrics
This is the second half of the post on collection management metrics, where we complete the set of 10 important ways to measure the value and ROI of your library collection.
Interlibrary loan (ILL) statistics – What content are you lending and what content are you borrowing? ILL has become a crucial addition to any institution’s collection. However, a detailed analysis of the numbers and the actual content being borrowed and lent may highlight some big gaps in your own collection that could be substituted for content that is being lent more than it is being used by your own end-users.
Access denied reports – Publishers often hold onto this information, but it’s hard to see why they would not want to share it following a request from a library customer (upselling opportunities abound!). However, knowing what content users are trying to get to, and to which you don’t subscribe, can also demonstrate another level of gap-filling that your internal requests have already initiated. COUNTER lists some standard reports that deal with access denied (or bounceback) data for journals and books in the latest version of their Code of Practice document (see: Journal Report 2, Books reports 3 & 4, and Title Report 2).
Repository usage – While this metric is usually focussed on content generated within the same institution/organisation, it is nevertheless part of the overall collection so it is important to be able to measure and report on the effectiveness of a repository as a vehicle for delivering that content to end-users. Depending on what the original objective for the repository is, you can adjust the way it is made available externally, updating user interfaces and so on, by analysing the underlying data. Repository record usage is the primary metric you should be concerned with but you can also apply standard web analytics tools such as Google Analytics, which can sync with repository platforms such as DSpace. This will show you internal and external event tracking, informing you on internal and external outreach efforts concerning the repository. If you intend for your repository material to be found and utilized by external parties, a good set of web analytics will also help your search engine optimization efforts to build the profile (and ranking) of the repository in Google and other search engines.
Managing a library collection is of great importance, not only to manage limited budgets and staff time but also to meet the learning needs of the end-user. Ultimately, these tie into the objectives of the institution or organization as a whole. We hope the list above is a good reference guide which you can use to assess the relevance of metrics or to undertake a systematic review of library collection materials.
Read the first post which covers the first 5 metrics here
Did we miss any? What metrics do you use most to measure your library collection?
You may also like
10 metrics you should be using to evaluate your library collection
Read the first part of this post with the first 5 metricsConnect met ons
About the Author