Search results

An examination of the methodology and results from patron use surveys of networked electronic services at four geographically disparate academic health science libraries in the USA between 1999 and 2002. The principal fields of inquiry include demographic differences between in‐house library users as compared to remote library users by status of user; users’ purposes for accessing electronic services; how the purpose of use differs between traditional, in‐person, library services; and differences in usage of electronic resources based upon the location of users. The results of this study should help guide service decisions in academic health sciences libraries.

The current stringent economic climate requires library managers to be more systematic in cost analyses. Allocating costs to cost centers, determining costs per unit of service, and correlating costs to specific categories of users, helps ensure accurate analyses of costs, productivity, and efficiency. Along with cost analysis, assessment of service is a key component in the complete analysis, for cost and efficiency must be related to quality and effectiveness. In addition to discussing the general process of determining costs for specific library services, this article focuses on the cost center model in more detail, with a case study of the cost of a library's support for grant‐sponsored research.

No matter what your level of sophistication in accounting and budgeting concepts, you surely know about the Chart of Accounts. Just because the term is familiar, however, does not mean that it can be ignored or taken lightly. Managers need to understand the basics on which the Chart of Accounts rests, its applications, the opportunities to use it to their advantage and even the “politics” of the term. With sophisticated and computerized accounting systems, it can be a useful information tool for librarians. We have organized this review under several management themes. Our hope is to help the experienced manager rethink something normally taken for granted and the beginning manager understand the basics of account structures.

As libraries are developing a larger Web presence, issues regarding the utility, accessibility, and impact of the usage of their networked resources and services are gaining critical importance. The need to assess systematically the networked electronic services and resources is great as increasing amounts of financial resources are dedicated to the Web presence of libraries. This paper aims to address this issue.

This project proposes to measure the impact of networked electronic services, building on MINES for Libraries^®, in a scalable way across libraries and consortia to enhance digital library service quality and impact on learning by enabling the future allocation of resources to areas of user‐identified need. Short, standardized web surveys are placed at the point‐of‐use of networked electronic resources and services through a network assessment infrastructure that uses contemporary mechanisms of authentication and access, such as EZproxy, openURL, Shibboleth, federated searching and others as modules to interface with ARL's StatsQUAL^®. A valid and reliable sampling method is proposed.

Point‐of‐use web surveys hold considerable promise as key tools in the assessment toolkit libraries may deploy to improve the research, teaching, and learning outcomes of their users.

This project enhances and deepens the information gained from vendor‐supplied data.

The developments described will make it easier for libraries to assess the usage of networked electronic resources and services.

Library accounts in the university financial accounting system should give administrators information for sound management decision. In light of the extensive body of literature published recently on library accounting and cost analysis, 12 university libraries were reviewed to determine whether their accounting practices were keeping up theory.

This paper, a case study with research implications, analyzes ebook use and users, focusing on ProQuest’s Electronic Book Library (EBL) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. The purpose of this paper is to understand ebook user attributes and behaviors in the context of print books and other eresources; to examine usage of EBL ebooks and print materials; and to explore differences between users of ebooks and print books.

The methodologies of the study are MINES for Libraries® implemented through EZproxy and an analysis of users and usage of EBL ebooks compared to print books based in part on the set of books available to the UMass community in both formats.

Undergraduates use print more often compared to graduate and faculty users. Among all uses of overlap materials in which materials are available in both formats, EBL and print, we find more print use. In all, 40 percent of EBL users did not check out any print library books, which would indicate that EBL created new users and new circulation that would not have otherwise occurred in print. Further, the findings show little difference by gender and ethnicity in the use of ebooks and print books and little evidence of lagging adoption of ebooks by faculty. When compared to campus-wide demographics, women and students of color use both print and ebooks in higher than expected rates.

Subject analysis of ebooks and print book usage and users by school or college are explored, highlighting differences between the two formats in certain subjects.

To report on the Coalition for Networked Information (CNI) held the Fall 2005 Task Force Meeting for its Task Force representatives and other participants in Phoenix, Arizona on December 5‐6, 2005.

Provides a concise review of the conference.

The meeting offered a wide variety of timely presentations that advanced and reported on CNI’s programs, projects and issues from Task Force member institutions and emphasized significant activities on the national and international arenas.

This paper is a useful summary of a conference of interest to library and information management professionals.

Where does our time go? Can we be more efficient with our own time? How come we never have enough time to get the things done that we want to do? Why do our lives seem so hectic and fractured in time? Are we doing the things that are most important to us and our work in our time?