Actually it's FrancEs (sorry but need to point it out)
But I wonder, have you tried without. My experience is people either bring
them back on time or not, and it is usually to get more books, why not
experiment I am sure your shelves would be about the same!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sheffield Libraries, Archives & Information"
<[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Date stamps
> Francis,
> Let me explain my logic. You questioned whether it actually mattered when
> people brought material back unless there was a waiting list. I believe
> that unless there is an obvious reminder or incentive to bring material
back
> then human nature being what it is a large proportion of users would just
> not bother (until they are prodded by a letter). I'm not arguing for the
> trusty date stamp, just that you need to set time limits on the return of
> material! Many users are not regular users of the library and could
borrow
> up to ten items from us then just not bother to bring the material back.
If
> follwoing your argument we took the attitude that it did not matter when
it
> came back, how long would it be before the shelves were badly denuded?
>
> I'm sure you are in favour of browsing, but I just believe that not
setting
> a return date would result in less material being available on the shelves
> for people to browse. The maximum number of items would only stop regular
> users from keeping material too long and thus emptying the shelves as they
> would obviously have to return items to borrow more. But this would not
> effect the users who perhaps only comes in once or twice a year.
>
> I do agree though that it is not a date stamp issue!
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frances Hendrix [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 18 January 2002 14:31
> To: Sheffield Libraries, Archives & Information;
> [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Re: Date stamps
>
>
> I don't think I for one minute suggested browsing was not to be
encouraged?
> And surely what prevents your shelves emptying is the restriction on the
> number of books a borrower has at a time, not the time he/she has an item
> for?
>
> I am afraid I do not understand your logic. I am all for more innovative
> ways of getting readers to extend their interests and taste, as some of
the
> innovative and interesting work now being done is illustrating. But none
of
> this involves or affects date stamps!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sheffield Libraries, Archives & Information"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 12:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Date stamps
>
>
> > It does matter when material comes back. The bulk of borrowing is not
> done
> > by reservations (this needs a degree of purpose on the part of the user
in
> > knowing what they want). Most borrowing is done either by browsing for
> > something to read, or through a need to find the best items in a general
> > subject area. How many book purchases are also made on the principle of
> > browsing? A great deal otherwise the book shops would not invest so
much
> > effort into displays etc. Apart from this, the obvious reason why we
need
> > to insist on a return date is that if we did not then there would be
> nothing
> > left on the shelves! Not much of an experience for someone browsing the
> > shelves.
> >
> > This is the 21st Century and I for one still want the experience of
> > browsing, selecting and handling a wide choice of books in my local
> library.
> >
> > John Murphy
> > Group Manager, ICT Development
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: A forum for discussion of the issues arising from implementing the
> > Internet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Frances
> > Hendrix
> > Sent: 18 January 2002 10:23
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Date stamps
> >
> >
> > I have been following this debate now for a week or more, and have to
say
> am
> > amazed at the detail, passion, concern, etc. But I do wonder if the
actual
> > date has any use for any one other than the borrower, and if only the
> > borrower, does it actually matter when they bring it back, unless there
is
> a
> > waiting list? Most people do bring stuff back (at some stage), and all
> this
> > effort for stamping and charging fines, is it really cost effective?
When
> I
> > borrow books from professional bodies of which I am a member , I simply
> get
> > a polite letter if they need it back. Are we hanging on to 'old'
practices
> > for no good reason than we do not want to move on, and like the
> 'authority'
> > of the date stamp, and the excuse we may need the data?
> >
> > This is the 21stCentury isn't it?
> >
> > I have however enjoyed the debate, learnt a lot, and it speaks volumes!
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Usher" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 7:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Date stamps
> >
> >
> > > Date stamps - like a lot of things in libraries (*and* other
> > organisations,
> > > commercial as well as public, lets not kid ourselves, or beat
ourselves
> > up),
> > >
> > > "Dead, but won't lie down"?
> > >
> > > In my 'umble opinion, technology is changing things (phone renewals =
> > > technology?), and some of the old tools and processes still do useful
> > jobs, but
> > > we just don't cost them out, because they're already there. Can we
still
> > > actually afford them?
> > >
> > > It was very useful and practical to shelf-check the Brown Issue (yes,
> I'm
> > that
> > > old...) against the shelves before sending overdues, in case items
were
> > not
> > > discharged properly (or snuck back on the shelves by a user to prevent
> > fines),
> > > but we stopped doing that when we automated loans and overdues, many
> moons
> > ago.
> > >
> > > Staff wanted to check a printout (Line Impact printed, continuous
> > feed,15"x11",
> > > green music-ruled, 3" thick...) before automated overdues were sent
out,
> > so we
> > > tried it - but two weeks later the reports hadn't been checked (what a
> > > surprise...), so, out went the overdues!
> > >
> > > The problems (or should I say challenges?) that the pre-overdues shelf
> > checks
> > > addressed were shifted about (generally to customer complaints), but
> > they're
> > > still there. Perhaps we should address the real problem of Quality
> Control
> > on
> > > discharge? and have book security systems work on entry as well as
exit?
> > >
> > > Perhaps we sometimes aren't actually concerned with being pro-active
in
> > the
> > > "Modernisation" (aargh! - apologies, had a funny turn there...) of our
> > services,
> > > but prefer to allow them to wither on the vine, and accept the
> > consequences?
> > >
> > > Or we take firm measures to remove old ways, whether staff like it or
> not
> > (and
> > > whether we've considered it properly or not), and accept the
> consequences?
> > >
> > > I suggest that, *IF* we *want* to phase out date stamps, we need to
> ensure
> > that
> > > that:
> > >
> > > The systems we deploy to create and extract Management Information
(MIS)
> > are
> > > simple to use and cost-effective, like an OPAC - not a set of techie
> tools
> > like
> > > BusinessObjects, Crystal Reports etc. (bit of a challenge to the
> suppliers
> > > lurking on the list - e.g. Dan at Geac earlier on).
> > >
> > > That we have a management commitment to provide *all* front-line staff
> > with
> > > fingertip access to timely, current, MIS (not just managers or
> > supervisors), in
> > > the format necessary for their purposes, just as we do Circulation and
> > OPAC
> > > systems, and the cost-benefits can be demonstrated to wean staff off
the
> > desire
> > > to keep date stamps/labels.
> > >
> > > This would also demonstrate that staff have been given the tools to
> manage
> > their
> > > stock properly. If any question arises that this is not being done
> > properly, the
> > > technology cannot be blamed.
> > >
> > > However, suspect we'll do some mix of all of this, the human condition
> > being
> > > what it is!
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > ps. Is a handful of 5"x3" catalogue cards still probably the best way
to
> > > shelf-check the catalogue? Answers on 2nd class snail-mail postcard,
> > please!
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------
> > > John Usher
> > > ICT Development Manager
> > > Islington Library & Information Service
> > > Education Department
> > > Central Library
> > > 2 Fieldway Crescent
> > > LONDON N5 1PF
> > >
> > > Tel: +44 (0)20 7527 6920
> > > Fax: +44 (0)20 7527 6926
> > > Switchboard: +44 (0)20 7527 6900
> > > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > > http://www.islington.gov.uk/libraries
> > >
> > > This email account may be opened by others in the owner's absence
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
****************************************************************************
> > ************
> > > This email and any files transmitted with it may contain information
> > > which is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is
> > > prohibited by law and intended solely for the use of the individual or
> > > entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in
> > > error please note any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> > > message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately
> > > if you have received this email by mistake and delete it from your
> > > system.
> > >
> > > Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
> > > information can be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
late
> > > or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not
accept
> > > liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message
> > > which arise as a result of email transmission. If verification is
> > > required please request a hard copy version.
> > > Thank you for your co-operation.
> > >
> >
>
****************************************************************************
> > ************
|
