NASIG Newsletter

22nd CONFERENCE
TACTICS SESSION 

Betting a Strong Hand in the Game of Electronic Resource Management
Paoshan Yue, Electronic Access Librarian, University of Nevada, Reno Libraries; Elizabeth S. Burnette, Acquisitions Department, North Carolina State University Libraries
Reported by Mavis B. Molto

This session addressed how to create an e-resource management model to meet the needs of users while using library resources effectively.  Paoshan Yue began the session by identifying the goal of the electronic resource management, ERM, game:  to “manage electronic resources in such a way that the users will get the utmost benefits from the e-resource products and services.”  She identified three components of electronic resource management:  staffing, tools, and workflows.  People choose tools and design workflows; tools stimulate skill upgrades in people and workflow changes; and workflows incorporate people and tools. 

At the University of Nevada, Reno Libraries, getting accurate e-journal links and holdings information into the databases quickly and consistently is the top priority.  ER lifecycle management is accomplished using the Innovative Millenium ERM; with ER access management provided by the Millennium Web OPAC, Microsoft Access Web Lists, and SFX Knowledgebase Find it software.  A detailed flow chart of the University of Nevada, Reno Library’s e-serials workflow is available at http://www2.library.unr.edu/serials/ERMworkflow.pdf.

Some suggestions for workflow design in ER access management include:  1) Aim to process data only once and repurpose them for different data stores, 2) Utilize existing tools fully and creatively and add new tools or replace old with new, 3) Leverage the strengths of your staff and tools and encourage skill upgrades in staff, and 4) Keep library end users in mind.

Elizabeth Burnette followed with a presentation that focused on the electronic resource workflow.  Periodic analysis is needed to maintain efficiency, due to changes in serials’ formats and product packaging along with new and improved tools to manage serials.  Areas that should be considered are staffing and workflow, especially bottlenecks and backlogs, workflow design, and improving efficiency.

For successful workflows, one should consider department objectives and library goals, and analyze both print and e-resource workflows so as to illuminate the differences between the two.  An objective of the workflow review is to hunt for inefficiencies to allow more resources for acquiring e-resources.  All processes in the serials workflow should be reviewed: selection, order, payment, access, and storage.  The major steps in both the print and the e-resource workflow analysis include:  1) Review existing documentation and policies, 2) Identify steps that have become obsolete, 3) Create and test a revised provisional workflow, 4) Implement the revised workflow, and 5) Establish a process to receive routine feedback.

Suggestions for optimizing efficiency include maximizing staff and integrating workflows.  If one decides to integrate print and e-resources processes, as is done at North Carolina State University Libraries, the following steps are suggested:  1) Identify processes being integrated, the process expert, the cohort being trained, and in what order, 2) Identify the tools used and development needed, 3) Consider current work volume and time needed to integrate, and 4) Communicate.