Ordering Using the Alma Network Zone

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 increased transparency across the system will assist in future collection development decisions. Bibliographic records are shared through the Network Zone (NZ) and Community Zone (CZ), and the inventory of individual campuses are visible to sister campuses within the consortium at the NZ level. 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) should not be ordered using the NZ.

Best practice recommendations

With the interest of system-wide collaboration in mind, it is best for physical and electronic resources to be linked to the NZ at the point of ordering, whenever possible.

Benefits:

• Consortium and campuses can make shared collection development decisions
• Consortium and campuses gain efficiency through shared cataloging and maintenance of bibliographic records
• Consortium and campuses save money on bibliographic records

Limitation:

• Consortial needs might be prioritized over institutional needs

Potential Real Life Examples:

Collection Development:

If bibliographic records are in the NZ (brief or full), other campuses can see what you have so they might be able to better make collection development decisions on the fly.  Let’s say hypothetically I see that Fresno has an ebook on the subject of water that Fullerton is thinking about getting but since Fresno has more of a specialization in that topical area and Fullerton needs to save money wherever we can, Fullerton might be inclined to say, let’s borrow it from Fresno instead of buying our own copy.

Cataloging and Discoverability:

Putting bibs in the NZ aids cataloging.  What if your campus has very little to no cataloging staff (I heard Sonoma mention this scenario quite a bit).  If Sonoma buys a book and has a brief record in the NZ but no expertise and/or capacity to catalog the item, if someone like Northridge buys the same book, they might get to the cataloging before Sonoma ever does, this saves Sonoma (and everyone else that intends to buy that same book) time.  If the initial brief order bibliographic records only exist 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 patrons access could have been somewhat impeded due to the low-level of discoverability the brief records offer compared to full records.

Acquisitions:

It  could save operational money if records are in the NZ.  Let’s say 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 that San Jose participates in WCP, which means San Jose is already on their way to receiving a full record for that resource.  If I already know this, I might be inclined to just order the Fullerton copy but opt out of getting and paying for a full bib. record myself as I would probably get the exact same 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.

The Ex Libris' document Ordering a Centrally Managed Electronic Resource outlines these steps, but the same principles also govern the ordering of physical resources (the reporting code field might require further review).

Action log