NASIG Newsletter

Envisioning the Future of ERM

Tim Jewell, University of Washington; and Ted Fons, Innovative Interfaces, Inc.

Reported by Chris Brady

Tim Jewell and Ted Fons presented this session covering emerging developments in electronic resource management (ERM). First covered in the session was ERMI (Electronic Resource Management Initiative), a program under the auspices of the Digital Library Foundation (DLF).  ERMI’s goals are to describe the data architecture needed to support ERM systems, to establish lists of elements and definitions, to create XML schema and DTDs, and to promote best practices and standards for data exchange, resulting in improved data and functionality of ERM systems in general. 

ERM systems are relatively new and most systems are in the first phases of implementation.  At this stage, libraries’ main concerns for ERM are tracking costs and tracking acquisitions/purchases.  Serials and acquisitions systems have done these functions well for a long time.  Many of these systems’ abilities should be transferable to ERM. 

ERM is now going through design revisions and bug fixes that have been discovered in the first round of system implementations and use.  Consolidation of the market is already happening.  Fortunately, this activity is leading to a new round of improvisation and re-development of ERM systems. 

Currently in ERMI, the data dictionary and data structure are complete; the focus now for ERMI2 is on creating data standards.  This involves revising the data dictionary and standardizing license expression terms.  ERMI2 is also developing professional training in license term mapping in conjunction with the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and DLF.  Finally, a common protocol for statistics collection and use is being developed. 

Usage statistics are driving the need to standardize collection and use of data, the proliferation of which has proved challenging. The lack of standard “containers” of data leads to time-consuming tasks of gathering, assembling, and reporting the data on a piecemeal basis.  Standardizing the reporting and analysis of data through the use of an XML format will result in consistency and a more efficient process.  NISO has set up the SUSHI Work Group with contributing partners EBSCO, ExLibris, and others; information is available at http://www.niso.org/committees/SUSHI/SUSHI_comm.html. 

SUSHI, the Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative, aims to create a machine protocol to manage usage statistics using an XML structure.  A practical example is calculating cost-per-use.  The acquisitions’ side of ERM is fairly well-developed.  With developments coming out of SUSHI, cost data are starting to be gathered at a very granular level, thus blending acquisitions and usage data together.  SUSHI also can help with automating administrative tasks.  Examples include IP registration, trial administration, account activations and renewals, incident reporting, sample license review, and license exchange.  Automation requires standards and cooperation between system developers and content providers.  Next for SUSHI is to seek endorsement by the library community.  We need to inform content providers of the advantages of adopting SUSHI standards and lobby them to do so. 

The COUNTER project (Counting Online Usage of NeTworked Electronic Resources) aims to standardize reported data.  For example, the first standardized report created under COUNTER (Journal Report 1) will enable data providers and users to directly compare usage data from vendor to vendor and from library to library.  The next standard report format is due to be completed in June 2007 and will focus on the auditing process. 

Regarding coverage data and standards for ERM, three areas to look at are an exchange standard for transmitting data, services to do this, and what data need to be exchanged.  An example of a standard is ONIX which, among other things, is used for exchanging online holdings data.  Some ILS vendors offer aggregator services which facilitate spreadsheet exchange.  In terms of what data need to be exchanged, enumeration is as important as chronological data. 

Link resolvers are another area of concern.  Library users access data from multiple sources; thus, we must account for license terms, scope notes, and announcements affecting access.  Such information is essential and helps sell what the library does, especially when many users do not equate accessing fee-based databases as “the library.”  Librarians must promote their role as access provider and counteract the common attitude reflected in this scary quote from a library user, “I don’t need the library; I get everything I need from EBSCO.” 

The remaining part of this session dealt with audience questions.  Concerns expressed from attendees included what kind of usage statistics would be gathered and how to ascertain the true meaning of “cost-per-use.”  Also, while usage statistics are often used in determining which expensive subscriptions to cut, they might also be used to increase usage and expenditures in some cases.  Data can be compared to assist in collection development, especially in comparing the cost of a subscription versus a “pay-per-use” model.