« a nation of pirates | main | Jiraiya »
Miller, Ruth H. Selected Review of the Literature on Collection Development
1 Feb 07
Miller, Ruth H. “Selected Review of the Literature on Collection Development and Collection Management, 1990-1995.” Collection Management for the 21st Century: A Handbook for Librarians. Eds. G. E. Gorman and Ruth H. Miller. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1997.
Miller’s article is now a little old, and the literature it reviews even older, but reading it prompted me to think of a couple things. Discussing the transition to electronic, she writes:
The discussion of the larger issues has sometimes been lost in catchy slogans, but the balancing act of obtaining resources for library users with limited funding pivots on resource sharing, from interlibrary loan to coordinated collection development. . . . (287-288)
I believe she meant to say “obtaining, with limited funding, resources for library users,” but I’m betting you got the point. For some reason this reminded me of Mita’s idea of listing simple goals for building a collection. If we approach the same kind of thing from a service perspective, a collection policy could read more like a list of pledges: “here’s what we promise to do for our patrons”. Examples could included things like
- will maintain relevant, recent holdings in all areas under study at Uwindsor
- will preserve access to important works in all disciplines
- will provide free ILL/document delivery services to the fullest extent possible
These are TOTALLY off the top of my head and would need considerable thought. However, there’s no point in putting out a meaningless feel-good document and calling it a policy. And only the last really speaks to services. I’m intrigued by the idea of developing a policy document that focusses on services.
Miller’s lit. review continues under 12 headings: access and ownership, acquisitions and budgeting, the Internet, cooperation, resource sharing, scholarly communication, serials, electronic publishing, organization, policy statements [yawn], selection and evaluation, and preservation. These could provide ideas for areas in which a policy document should make service pledges.
Interestingly, under the access and ownership heading, Miller cites an article by Thomas W. Shaughnessy:
Shaughnessy discusses the difficulty of maintaining collection strengths during a shift in focus; he notes that bigger is not necessarily better, contrasts the “supply-oriented” to the “demand-driven” library, and calls for evaluating the cost of access with costs of ownership. . . . (289)
I’ve mentioned in other posts on this topic that I like the idea of a user-centred collection policy. The tone of the literature Miller discusses under this heading is distinctly in favour of just-in-case vs. just-in-time acquisition. The terms don’t map exactly, but I can’t help but think just-in-case ≅ supply-oriented, collection-centred, and object-focussed; just-in-time ≅ demand-driven, user-centred, and service-focussed.
Also Cited
Shaughnessy, Thomas W. “From Ownership to Access: A Dilemma for Library Managers.” Journal of Library Administration 14 (1991): 1-7.
Posted by pzed on February 1, 2007 at 12.40pm
Categories: collection policies, libraries
