The CIPFA guidelines for reporting loans of stock, which all library
services complete, clearly INCLUDE renewals. I think their
guidance is both clear and fair:
"Loans to final borrowers only are to be included. For issues to
institutions, playgroups etc. count only the initial issues made by the
library staff or computer system.
i) Loans of uncatalogued material, e.g. if a book is issued before
a record is created...
ii) All renewals made in response to an approach from a reader.
It is not helpful to start saying something or other is wrong before
checking what the position actually is. If you want to make a point
please CHECK IT FIRST. Calculations of loans are certainly not
"secrets" or "lies" and such suggestions bring the profession in to
disrepute.
If you don't like a definition, fair enough, debate it, but don't accuse
the profession of trying to mislead without doing some basic checking.
Doing so is VERY unhelpful.
Robert Clayton
Museum Library & Archive Manager
Rutland County Council
Tel: 01572 758435
Fax: 01572 724906
Post: Oakham Library, Catmos Street, Oakham, Rutland,
LE15 6HW
2008 - The National Year of Reading
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> Frances Hendrix
<
[log in to unmask]> 15/08/2008 14:04 >>>
But if
one borrower has an item for a long period (and I don't see a problem
with
that if there isn't a waiting list), how is that indicative of
effective
performance of stock?. You have of course satisfied one borrower
very
much, but it is hardly an indication of the performance of the stock
is it?
Surely issue figures relate to one book to one borrower on
one occasion, not
multiple occasions if it is renewed by the same
person.
I do think this all needs to be bottomed out, but I can see the
risks if
everyone now decides to come clean on why charge fines, and why
massage!
issue figures. We need libraries to be 'judged' by a set of
standards NOT
related to the simple issue of books. remember the Laser
work done by PwC on
Output measures, much more sophisticated and worth
doing.
Now we are bandying figures and comments about without the help
of hard
evidence (and I don't mean the now suspect issue
figures).
f, well make a guess!
Frances Hendrix
Martin House
Farm, Hilltop Lane, Whittle le Woods, Chorley, Lancs PR6 7QR,
UK
tel:
01257 274 833. fax: 01257 266 488
email:
[log in to unmask]----- Original Message -----
From: "Day
Robert" <
[log in to unmask]>
To:
<
[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 9:25
AM
Subject: Re: fines:secrets and lies or shadow boxing?
It's
only misleading if the initial assumption is that issue figures do NOT
contain renewals and given that all authorities report performance data!
to
the same body subject to the same criteria I don't believe thi s to be
the
case. Is any authority really claiming that renewals are new issues to
a
different borrower?
I think you can make a good case that it
shouldn't happen and that renewals
should count separately from issues or,
in some other way, be able to
calculate issues to unique borrowers. On the
other hand, regardless of
whether it be an issue or renewal it means that
the item in question is in
use and thus when looking at the effective
performance of a stock item both
need to be taken into account.
Historically I imagine there was also a case
to be made that renewals
occupied as much staff time as a new issue and thus
needed to be recorded
similarly - this is much less so now with the facility
for customers to
either use the web OPAC and/or use automatd telephone
renewal
systems.
Finally, I have to ask since it's been puzzling me but just
what is the
lower case 'f' all about?
Regards
Robert
Day
Ca! mbridgeshire Libraries, UK
-----Original
Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public
Libraries
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Frances
Hendrix
Sent: 15 August 2008 08:58
To:
[log in to unmask]Subject: Re: fines:secrets and lies or shadow
boxing?
Well if a renewal by the same person is counted as a new
issue to a
different borrower, that is misleading. There has been an
indication of this
in the responses. off line there have been far more
worrying trends
mentioned that inflate or massage the figures of use etc
which have been
happening for many many years, and quite honestly
astonishes and disappoints
me. I know we live in a number crunching
world (but these practices seemt o
pre date that),where performance tick
box data is the norm, but I just
thought libraries were different and
better.
It would appear my 'thought out of the blue' was
correct.
I look forward to reading you! r thoughts and comments in the
Guardian.
f
Frances Hendrix
Ma rtin House Farm, Hilltop Lane, Whittle
le Woods, Chorley, Lancs PR6 7QR,
UK
tel: 01257 274 833. fax:
01257 266 488
email:
[log in to unmask]----- Original Message
-----
From: "Loz Pycock" <
[log in to unmask]>
To:
<
[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 9:17
PM
Subject: Re: fines:secrets and lies or shadow boxing?
>
Frances Hendrix wrote:
>> Just had a thought.
>> Have
the statistics on lending been skewed for years? If every renewal
>>
of a book (maybe even to avoid fines), has been counted by public
>>
libraries as a new loan and a new borrower, hasn't it been a case
of
>> misleading information?
>>
> Please could you
explain why you think it's misleading?
>
> --
> -
--
> Loz
>
> "Dora The Explorer tastes like brain
damage."
> -
http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20070803.html>
"I support gay marriage because I believe they have a right to be just
>
as miserable as the rest of us." - Kinky Friedman
>
The
information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you receive this
email by mistake please notify the sender and delete it immediately.
Opinions expressed are those of the individual and do not necessarily
represent the opinion of Cambridgeshire County Council. All sent and
received email from Cambridgeshire County Council is automatically scanned
for the presence of computer viruses and security
issues