Just to add my 10 pence worth - we also use the cost per download evidence
and for many journals where we take them individually (ie they are not part
of a package) we have said that if they get less than x accesses per year,
we will cancel. At the moment we are using 75 as our value for x, but we do
consider renewing in special circumstances - ie if the journal is only
relevant to a single course which has only a small number of students (ie
less than 75).
By looking at usage on a title by title basis we have identified many
titles which academics thought were vital, but, which only got 4 or 5 uses
per year - so ILLs are a cheaper option and our academics have understood
this.
Cathy
********************************************************************
Catherine Phillpotts BA (Hons), MA, MCLIP
Director of Library Services
London Metropolitan University
Room LC1-31, Holloway Road Learning Centre
236 Holloway Road
London N7 6PP
020 7133 2101
[log in to unmask]
Follow Library Services on Facebook and Twitter
http://www.facebook.com/londonmetlibrary
http://twitter.com/londonmetlib
London Metropolitan University:
Transforming Lives, Meeting Needs, Building Careers
********************************************************************
On 9 January 2015 at 14:31, Tom Francis [tbf] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Caroline,
>
> We generally do something like this every year now, although the scale and
> criteria vary from year-to-year depending on the circumstances.
> Most journal subscriptions are allocated to a specific academic
> department's library fund; so even though we (the library) pays for
> everything from our funds, academics have a sense of responsibility for
> "their" journals.
>
> Our subscription review exercises begin with compiling a list of all subs
> for each department which will include, where available, the cost for each
> of the last three years (so people can see how the price gets ratcheted up
> annually), usage stats, and cost per download. Cost per download is main
> yardstick we use; if the cost of journal divided by the number of downloads
> equals more than the cost of getting an article via inter-library loan,
> then we'd strongly recommend it gets cancelled. Not a hard-and-fast rule,
> but it's a good conversation starter.
>
> The subject librarians take this list to library reps within the
> departments and liaise, asking academics to check their subscriptions and
> make sure everything is still relevant. We'll get a few responses along the
> lines of "why do we still subscribe to this?" or "crikey! I had no idea
> this journal cost that much - we can live without it". Often just doing
> that generates enough cancellations, although some years we have had to be
> more forceful, e.g. saying "you have to cancel 5% of your subscriptions".
> This does require a lot of dialogue with academic staff, and always some
> departments are more engaged than others. We haven't yet got to the stage
> where I start cancelling things based on my own whim, although I have
> threatened it in the past! We have found though that if we're open with
> academic staff and explain the situation (i.e. that annual journal
> inflation is impossible to keep up with), they are sympathetic and helpful.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Tom
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: An informal open list set up by UKSG - Connecting the Information
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Caroline
> Dean
> Sent: 09 January 2015 13:37
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [lis-e-resources] subscription review/cancellation exercise - the
> 3 scenarios
>
> ***Cross-posted to multiple lists; please excuse duplication.***
>
> Dear colleagues
>
> The subscriptions (e-journals, p-journals, databases) budget at the
> University of Cape Town Libraries is facing a budget cut. Our finance
> department has asked us to draw up scenarios on what the impact to the
> university will be if the subscriptions budget is cut by 5, 10 and 15%?
>
> Have you undertaken such an exercise recently? Or even a straight-forward
> review/cancellation exercise? What are some of the criteria you used to
> evaluate titles for retention or cancellation?
>
> Thank you
>
> Regards
> Caroline
>
>
>
> Caroline Dean
> Acquisitions Manager
> University of Cape Town Libraries,
> Private Bag X3, Rondebosch, 7701, South Africa.
>
> Tel: +27 21 6503701
> Fax: +27 21 6502044
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN
>
> This e-mail is subject to the UCT ICT policies and e-mail disclaimer
> published on our website at
> http://www.uct.ac.za/about/policies/emaildisclaimer/ or obtainable from +27
> 21 650 9111. This e-mail is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is
> addressed. If the e-mail has reached you in error, please notify the
> author. If you are not the intended recipient of the e-mail you may not
> use, disclose, copy, redirect or print the content. If this e-mail is not
> related to the business of UCT it is sent by the sender in the sender's
> individual capacity.
>
>
>
> lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org UKSG groups also
> available on Facebook and LinkedIn Follow us on Twitter:
> https://twitter.com/UKSG
>
> lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org
> UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
> Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/UKSG
>
Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo
lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org
UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/UKSG
|