|
Editor’s Note: We invited the authors to submit this article in follow up to a presentation they made at the 2021 Medical Library Association vConference.
In late 2019, faced with a fiscal shortfall due to a flat budget and the rising cost of electronic resources, the Head of Collection Management and the Head of Education & Research at the University of Colorado Strauss Health Sciences Library sought feedback from the campus community about some difficult renewal choices. In previous years, the subject liaison librarians in Education & Research were asked to solicit feedback from their liaison audiences, but this feedback was anecdotal at best and limited to the groups of faculty and clinicians with whom the liaisons had had the most interaction. In the fall of 2020, the library’s materials budget faced additional threats due to COVID-19, so the survey was updated and repeated.
The two department heads created a campus-wide survey for the clinical, research, and academic library users at the Anschutz Medical Campus. Based on a journal cancellation survey created by librarians at the University of New Mexico (Nash and McElfresh, 2016), the survey asked library users to rate library resources based on their use of them: “Never Use,” “Rarely Use,” “Useful,” “Important,” or “Essential.” Survey respondents were able to comment on how they used the resources as well. The survey was distributed via a campus-wide email list and promoted by the liaison librarians. In 2019, 630 results were received, and in 2020, 512 results were received, each in a span of about four weeks from November into December.
From the survey results, the Head of Collection Management focused on items’ data in “Essential” and “Important” categories to guide decisions on electronic resources based on the survey respondents' estimations of their importance. Specifically, if the total percentage of survey respondents ranking a resource as “Essential” or “Important” was lower than a target number, it triggered a review for potential cancellation. This data complemented the use data provided by vendors, which had historically been critical to renewal decisions. Other decisions were informed by the current global pandemic, including the topics of vaccination and public health. Considerations of resources that supported diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the library and on campus also played into the process. Finally, the Head of Collection Management also considered their shared goal to continuously support high-quality small and society publishers in collection development.
While only about 20 percent of the respondents in both years added free text comments, those comments and the themes that emerged were enlightening. Comments about both known and unknown items were made frequently, including requests for new items and comments underscoring the importance of existing items. Another common theme that emerged was the overall lack of understanding about the e-resources subscription management process, which signaled that an educational campaign would be beneficial. A pleasant surprise was the multiple positive compliments for the library’s interlibrary loan service and for the management of online collections.
In both 2019 and 2020, the survey provided actionable data to guide renewal decisions with greater confidence. It also greatly increased and improved communication and user engagement in the collection decisions process and educated users campus-wide about the nature and challenges of the library’s materials budget. Finally, the surveys minimized the number of complaints about electronic resources that were not selected for renewal.
----------------
1 Jacob Nash and Karen McElfresh, "A journal cancellation survey and resulting impact on interlibrary loan," Journal of the Medical Library Association, 2016 Oct; 104(4):296-300, doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.008. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27822151
DCT Featured Article - April 13, 2022
|
