ILL in the faster lane: empowering users with HKALL

1
ILL in the faster lane empowering users with
HKALL

• Peter SIDORKO
• Deputy Librarian
• The University of Hong Kong
• Co-authors
• Ruth WONG
• The University of Hong Kong
• Alice TAICity University of Hong Kong
• Eva WONGCity University of Hong Kong

2
This paper

• Introduction of a user initiated ILL service in
  HK - HKALL
• Why we chose to do this
• How we introduced and implemented the service
• The issues that confronted us
• The data we collected
• The analysis of data and feedback
• The way forward

3
What is HKALL

• Hong Kong Academic Library Link
• A user initiated ILL service
• A Hong Kong implementation of IIIs
  (INNOVATIVEs) INN-Reach system
• (Initially, at least) an experimental service to
  test the waters

4
Why?

• Positive experiences in the USA
• Changes to Higher Education in Hong Kong
• Demographics
• Economy (knowledge based movement)
• Impact of technology
• Reduced funding
• Desire for deep collaboration among the eight
• Geography

5
How

• Taskforce with representatives from all 8
  institutions charged to explore
• The experience of other consortia employing user
  initiated document delivery including the pros
  and cons of its use
• The use of software/utilities/systems which could
  be used by the JULAC Libraries to facilitate user
  initiated document delivery
• The value/non value of using net borrower
• The resource implications (e.g. reduce ILL-based
  borrowing and lending but will likely see
  significant increase on circulation increase,
  etc.)
• Our interim report recommended
• That such a service was a good idea for HK
• That a suitable software platform be selected and
  implemented

6
Software prerequisites

• Accept user initiated online ILL requests
• Support unmediated ILL requests directly from
  users to lending libraries
• Support monograph loans
• Check incoming ILL requests automatically against
  the users own collection, and block that request
  if the requested item was available on the shelf
• Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) characters

7
The Chosen one

• INN Reach from III met all criteria
• Support of CJK was a great strength
• All 8 institutions were already III customers
  using their ILS

8
What happened next?

• Only 3 libraries agreed to proceed
• 5 adopted a wait and see approach
• Their concerns included
• Cost
• Impact on local collections and users
• Impact on library staff
• Possible threat of reduced funding

9
Three pilot participants

• Lingnan University
• City University of Hong Kong
• The University of Hong Kong Library

10
Lingnan UniversityFong Sum Wood Library (LU)

• Smallest university library collection in Hong
  Kong
• ca 400,000 physical vols
• Established in 1968
• Liberal arts tradition
• ca 2,000 students FTE
• ca 240 teaching staff FTE

11
City University of Hong Kong Run Run Shaw
Library (CityU)

• The University and Library were established in
  1984 originally as a Polytechnic
• Faculties Business Humanities and Social
  Sciences Science and Engineering Schools of
  Creative Media and Law
• ca 1.1 million physical volumes
• ca 12,500 students FTE
• ca 1,900 teaching staff FTE

12
The University of Hong Kong Library (HKU)

• Established 1912
• Oldest University and university library in HK
• Established in the tradition of a British
  university
• Comprehensive in PG and UG
• Research intensive
• ca 11,500 students FTE
• ca 3,500 Teaching staff FTE
• ca 2.3 million physical volumes
• ca 240 library staff

13
What we wanted to know

1. Would the use of INN-Reach alter the amount of
   borrowing and lending between these three
   institutions
2. Would some libraries use it more than others
3. What subjects of materials would be borrowed
4. What would be the differences in the amount of
   Western language versus Chinese language books
   borrowed

14
What we wanted to know

1. Would the use of INN-Reach speed up the process
   of borrowing a book
2. Would the use of INN-Reach decrease the costs of
   processing a borrowing/lending request
3. What classes of users would use this new system
   more/less
4. How would our patrons react to this new system?

15
The Implementation

• Confrontations and lessons learnt

16
Confronting issues (1)

• Building the HKALL Union Catalogue
• Matching CJK records

17
Confronting issues (2)

• Setting up HKALL circulation rules and policies
• Principals
• minimise policies that interfere with local
  circulation practices while still trying to
  maximise use of the mega collection
• ensure that the policies would not undermine the
  interest of users in the owning libraries and
• make the policies as simple as possible so that
• they are easily understood by both users and
  operational staff members
• operational procedures are simple and
  administrative costs are minimal
• they can readily include new participating
  libraries.

18
Confronting issues Policies (2)

• Materials for circulation
• Eligible users
• Loan quotas and periods
• Recalls
• Renewals
• Overdues and fines
• Loss and damage of books

19
But how does it work?
20
Easy as

1. User at library X searches for a book
2. Item not held/on loan at library X
3. User clicks HKALL button
4. HKALL reveals all holdings and availability of
   item
5. User requests item
6. User authenticates
7. System assigns request using availability and
   load bearing algorithm

21
Easy as

1. Request received by assigned library who
   retrieves item from shelves
2. Lending library performs institutional check-out
   of item and sends via courier to borrowing
   library
3. Borrowing library checks in item, generates email
   notice to user to collect item
4. User collects item (mostly), reads item
   (sometimes) and returns item to home library
   before due date (occasionally)
5. Borrowing library performs institutional check-in
   returns item via courier to lending library
6. Lending library checks item in.

22
From the users perspective
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
What we learnt Quantitative analysis

29
1. Would transactions between these three
institutions change?
Period CityU HKU LU
ILL03 1,229 570 282
ILL04 921 242 222
HKALL 4,494 1,858 1,281
30
2. Would some libraries use it more than others?
Library Borrow Lend
CityU 3,870 1,682
HKU 1,736 3,191
LU 1,152 1,885
Total 6,758 6,758
31
3. What subjects would be most borrowed/lent?
Subject CityU HKU LU
General Works/ Bibliography - - -
Philosophy/ Psychology/ Religion - - B1
Social Science/ Law/Education B1, L1 B1, L1 B2, L1
Science/Technology B2, L3 B2, L2 L2
Arts/Architecture - - -
Language/Literature B3, L2 B3, L3 B1, L3
History/ Geography - - -
32
HKU Analysis of borrowed subjects
Subject Judged Appropriate
Medical 17
Law 24
Arts/Architecture 24
Social Science/ Education 41
Science/Technology 49
33
4. Western vs CJK
34
5. Speed up borrowing?

• 95 of requests during the pilot project were met
  within two working days.
• 9 of traditional ILL requests are met in this
  timeframe.

35
6. Decrease processing costs?
Per Item HKALL HK ILLiad HK Difference
Lending Cost 8.37 14.48 6.11 (42)
Borrowing Cost 5.97 10.9 4.93 (45)
36
7. Who used it?
User Type Transactions
Staff (academic and non-academic) 1,409
PG Students 1,357
UG Students 4,257
37
What we learnt Qualitative analysis
38
8. Patrons views

• 80 excellent or good source of obtaining
  materials not available from their host library
• 73 appreciated integration into the local
  library system
• 80 found redirecting a search from the local
  catalogue to HKALL excellent or good
• These features were considered excellent or good
• view outstanding requests (68)
• cancel requests (65)
• renew items (71)

39
8. Patrons views

• 76 liked being kept informed of their request
  status by email notices
• 67 expressed a high degree of satisfaction with
  the fulfillment rate and 62 with the turnaround
  time
• 88 would like to see more libraries included

40
Typical comments

• Excellent on the whole
• this scheme has been excellently carried out.
  With this scheme, resources in the universities
  can be better utilised.
• HKALL simply makes life easier. Thank you.
• It should include all eight institutions in HK.

41
The Future

• Confirmation of results from other studies
• Interest generated among remaining five libraries
• HK Governments (UGC) awards HK10 million (1m or
  Kr16m)
• A single, fully integrated system managing both
  interlibrary lending as well as document
  delivery??