A Tale of Two Consortia
-
Upload
rogan-hamby -
Category
Education
-
view
122 -
download
0
Transcript of A Tale of Two Consortia
ATaleofTwoConsortia
Rogan Hamby
Feelfreetointerrupt.
SelectedReading
"TheConsortial EffectinDetail:TheSCLENDSExperience"
byRobertMolyneux &RoganHambyLibraryandBookTradeAnnual,
57thEdition,2012
DataCaveats
ThedatafrombothconsortiumsisfromtheirstartsuntiltheendofJuly2015.
Dataisaggregatedbyowner,libraryandtransactionsbutthereisnocopy,bibliographicoruserleveldatathatwouldhelpanswersomeofthelongtailquestions.
TheConsortia
NCCardinal
SCLENDS
TwoConsortia- Similarities
wellestablished2011/2009publicw/astatelibrary
similarmixorurbanandruralsimilareconomicdiversity
similarculturalandregionalinfluencesbothareresourcesharing
TwoConsortia- Similarities
longerperiodofconstantmembership
moremunicipalmore
regionals
CopyrightbyPuck,usedunderCCAttribution License2.5
Ididremovethestandarddeviants.
CirculationsinDataSet
45,629,855Circulations
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
Jun-09
Aug-09
Oct-09
Dec-09
Feb-10
Apr-1
0
Jun-10
Aug-10
Oct-10
Dec-10
Feb-11
Apr-1
1
Jun-11
Aug-11
Oct-11
Dec-11
Feb-12
Apr-1
2
Jun-12
Aug-12
Oct-12
Dec-12
Feb-13
Apr-1
3
Jun-13
Aug-13
Oct-13
Dec-13
Feb-14
Apr-1
4
Jun-14
Aug-14
Oct-14
Dec-14
Feb-15
Apr-1
5
Jun-15
HoldsinDataSet
3,526,910holds
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Jun-09
Aug-09
Oct-09
Dec-09
Feb-10
Apr-1
0
Jun-10
Aug-10
Oct-10
Dec-10
Feb-11
Apr-1
1
Jun-11
Aug-11
Oct-11
Dec-11
Feb-12
Apr-1
2
Jun-12
Aug-12
Oct-12
Dec-12
Feb-13
Apr-1
3
Jun-13
Aug-13
Oct-13
Dec-13
Feb-14
Apr-1
4
Jun-14
Aug-14
Oct-14
Dec-14
Feb-15
Apr-1
5
Jun-15
TerminologyofHolds
LocalHolds– withinsystem
ICLs– IntraConsortiaLoans
ILLs– InterLibraryLoans(extraconsortia)
ICLs2009– 2015AllLibraries
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ICLs2009– 2015SmallerLibraries
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Question1
IstherealongtermpatterntoICLs?
PercentageofHoldsOverTime
0.00
1000.00
2000.00
3000.00
4000.00
5000.00
6000.00
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
June2009- July 2015AverageICLsasPercentages
Question2
Dolibrarieshaveademandthresholdordoesitscalewithavailablematerials?CanwesaythereisapointthatICLswillmaxout?Wheyeven
askthis?
StableSample
• SCLENDSLibrariesthathavebeenlivesinceDecember2009
• 9insample• StateLibraryexcludedbecauseIcan’tmeaningfullyapplycriterialikepovertyandpopulationscorestoitwithit’sspecialuserbase
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
SCLENDSICLsasPercentageswithGoLives
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
SCLENDSLibrariesasofDec2009OnlyOnward
282%
247%
226%235%
212%
166%
vs414%Forall
vs349%Forall
NCCardinallibrariesdidnothaveasimilargolivepattern.Itwas16monthsfortheirfirstnine
systemstogolive.Alternativelytheyhad4librariesgoliveinsixmonth.Icouldhave
chosenthefirstsinglegolivebutthatwouldhaveahighvariance.Isplitthedifferencebychoosingthefirst7libraries,whichwentlive
over10months.
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
OriginalGoLiveLibrary’s RiseofICLsaspercentagesmonthtomonth
maxsclends 350%
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
900.00
1000.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
NCCardinalLibrariesasofMarch2012w/PercentageICLsvsLaterGoLivesICLsasPercentages
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
PercentagesofHoldsMonthtoMonth
SCLENDS NCCardinal
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374
GrowthofICLsofEarlyLibraries
SCLENDS NCCardinal
Resultisthatconsortiamagnifythedepthofcollectionsandhaveasignificantimpactbutitisinconclusiveifthereisapredictablesaturationpoint.SCdatasuggestsasaturationpointmet
whileNCdatadoesnot.
Isthereapopulationdifferencethatwouldexplainthesediscrepancies?
Population
58,192
101,374
mean
range
112,618
230468
TwoSmallerLibrariesFromEarlyAdopters
Smallestinearlyadoptersets.Popsof41,434and46,125.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69
NCCardinalvsSCLENDSSingleEarlyAdopter
TwoLargeLibraries
Popsof245,346and250,539.
0
50
100
150
200
250
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73
SClargelibrarypercentofholds vsNClargelibrarypercentofholds
Thistellsusweshouldprobablydigdeepercontrollingforpopulation.
Smalllibrarieshavegreaterpotentialforvariationbutherewesawitwiththelarge
libraries.
Inothervariables…
IndexMundi’s2009-2013indexofpopulationbelowpovertyindex
Itwouldbecriticalthatweadditionallycontrolforpatron,itemandbibliographicleveldatato
betteranswerthesequestions.
Addingon…ifIcan
FromCirc andHoldsreports:PatronID,ItemID
FromAsset/BibTables:ItemID,BibID,020/022/024,normalizedtitle,author,TCN
SCLENDS,NCCardinal,GAPINES