...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
| Page Properties | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Table of Contents |
|---|
Background
Libraries need to make collection development and acquisitions decisions based on the most accurate and current data – a necessity even more important in the CSU's shared environment. Alma’s consortial functionalities provide real-time look into the acquisitions activities of CSU libraries and the . The increased transparency across the system will assist in future collection development decisions and technical services work. Bibliographic records are shared through the Community Zone (CZ) and Network Zone (NZ) and Community but local information available via the Institutions Zone (CZ), and the inventory of individual campuses are IZ). Physical and electronic inventory can be connected to the bibliographic records and represent a single exemplar of an information resource that a campus physically has or electronically has access to. For individual campuses, inventory is managed locally in the IZ and the order records, which can also be connected to bibliographic records and inventory, are managed locally in the IZ. Ideally, inventory and order records of the Chancellor's Office and individual campuses should be visible to sister campuses within the consortium at the NZ level. For more information about Alma's data entity relationships, please refer to Ex Libris' documentation (e.g., Alma Topologies, Introduction to the Network Zone, and Introduction to Alma Inventory).
The sophisticated linking across the different record types at different levels makes it important to prevent the creation of redundant records. A policy outlining the preferred method of linking order records to bibliographic records in the appropriate zone(s) is necessary to avoid duplication of records and support the on-going maintenance of shared records. The benefits and the impact of creating order records based on the CZ, NZ, and Institution Zone ( IZ ) have been considered. For the purposes of this discussion, digital resources are not considered since Alma's management and workflows of digital resources have not yet been discussed consortially.
Policy Statement
In accordance with the policy set forth by the TSWG in Working in Alma and the Network Zone, when ordering resources for campus libraries that are to be made visible in the NZ, acquisitions staff at CSU libraries should create orders linking to bibliographic records in the NZ, thereby sharing updated library inventory with the consortium. Resources that are not expected to be shared in the NZ (e.g., laptops, other in-house equipment, non-collection type of resources, resources with prohibitive licenses from sharing metadata) should not be ordered using the NZ.
| Note |
|---|
The final policy will be informed by the following recommendations of the ER Task Force: |
Best practice recommendations
...
If bibliographic records are in the NZ (brief or , full, and anywhere in between), other individual campuses can see what you have so they is available in the consortium and might be able to better make collection development decisions on the fly. Let’s say hypothetically I see that Fresno has an ebook If hypothetically Fullerton got a book request from a student on the subject of water that Fullerton is thinking about getting but since Fresno has more of , Fullerton might notice that Fresno has the item and it fits better into Fresno's collection since they have a specialization in that topical area and Fullerton needs to save money wherever we can, Fullerton . Fullerton might be inclined to say, let’s borrow it the item from Fresno instead of buying our their own copy.
Cataloging and Discoverability:
Putting bibs Sharing bibliographic records in the NZ aids cataloging . What if your and discovery. If hypothetically a campus has very little to no cataloging staff (I heard Sonoma mention this scenario quite a bit). If Sonoma buys a book and has , creates a brief bibliographic record in the NZ but no expertise and/or capacity to catalog the item, if someone like Northridge buys the same book, they and links the order record, another campus in the consortium buying the same item with higher cataloging capacity might get to the cataloging before Sonoma ever does, this saves Sonoma (and everyone else that intends to buy that same book) time. of the resource, saving all other campuses time in cataloging that particular item. If the initial brief order bibliographic records record only exist resides in the IZs, they can potentially sit there at Sonoma for a long time before they get cataloged, and they might learn later that someone else cataloged it in the NZ but because they weren’t linked to the NZ bib. record, they didn’t get the updated version of the record and in the meantime Sonoma’s IZ, the campus that put the brief bibliographic record in the IZ would not know nor benefit if another campus catalogs the same item in the NZ, until they go through the backlog and find the full record in the NZ. In the meantime that campus' patrons access could have been somewhat impeded due to the low-level of discoverability the brief records offer, compared to full bibliographic records.
Acquisitions:
It Sharing bibliographic records in the NZ could save operational money if records are in the NZ. Let’s say in purchasing full bibliographic records from cataloging vendors. If hypothetically Fullerton intends to buy a book from Gobi , I see that there is already a brief order bib. in the NZ from San Jose and I know but notices a brief bibliographic record put into the NZ by San Jose. Fullerton is already aware that San Jose participates in WorldCat Cataloging Partners (WCP), which means San Jose is already on their way to receiving will both pay for and receive a full bibliographic record for that resource . If I already know this, I from OCLC. Fullerton might be inclined to just only order the Fullerton copy of the book but opt out of getting requesting and paying for a full bib. record myself as I would probably get the exact same full bibliographic record from OCLC as San Jose, so Fullerton can avoid paying duplicate for the same record.
Procedures in Alma
As a general overview, 1) the NZ should be consulted for matching bibliographic records. If a match is found, the local Purchase Order Line (POL) should be linked to that bibliographic record. In the event that no existing bibliographic record match is found in the NZ, 2) external sources should be consulted and appropriate record brought into the NZ, then POL is linked to the NZ bibliographic record. In order to maintain a consistent and accurate NZ catalog, 3) brief bibliographic records may be created and linked to the NZ in accordance with the policy In-Process Brief Bib Records & Minimum Acquisitions Data provided no appropriate bibliographic record is already available in the NZ or via external resources.
...
| Section | Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Last action taken | Next action required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Articulate the need for the policy (background) |
| : consulted with task force on the need for policy; working draft submitted | : policy statement creation | |
Create a Policy Statement |
| |||
Identify and create best practice recommendations |
| |||
Where applicable, identify and write up procedures in Alma |
| : requires feedback, suggestions, comments, etc.; requires potential consolidation with ER TF policies | ||
| Need to update policy in accordance with the ERM Task Force's recommendation to prefer the CZ; discussion regarding ebook one-off ordering using the CZ still pending | ||||
| Consulted Acquisitions/ERM Functional Committee. To be retained as Best Practice | Luiz Mendes | /9 |
Tasks to be completed
- Type your task here, using "@" to assign to a user and "//" to select a due date