ACQNET v2n041 (March 24, 1992) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acq-v2n041 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 2, No. 41, March 24, 1992 ====================================== (1) FROM: Peter Stevens SUBJECT: Academic Book Center survey (9 lines) (2) FROM: Richard Jasper SUBJECT: Academic Book Center survey (22 lines) (3) FROM: Barry Fast SUBJECT: Academic Book Center survey (60 lines) (4) FROM: Thelma Diercks SUBJECT: Pre-publication orders (19 lines) (5) FROM: Jeanne-Elizabeth Combs SUBJECT: PALINET Acquisitions User Group (21 lines) (6) FROM: Judith Eannarino SUBJECT: Job announcement (24 lines) (1) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1992 08:37:39 -0800 (PST) From: Peter Stevens Subject: Academic Book Center survey I think Joe Barker was trying to commend me for obtaining HIGH discounts. I have to admit that the Academic survey looked to me like the sort of thing I could fill out, longhand, and put back in the mail without further thought--and without making a copy. If I'd kept a copy, I'd be comfortable sharing it with other vendors. By the way, isn't Bob Schatz on ACQNET? (2) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 92 16:44:26 EST From: Richard Jasper Subject: Academic Book Center survey Four out of five dentists prefer "Crest," Lee Iacocca regularly bashes his competition by name, and _Consumer Reports_ has just come out with its latest ratings of automotive safety, durability etc. Somehow I just can't get exercised over the notion that there is something unseemly about one of my vendors asking me to rate his service in comparison to the other folks I use. If you ask me, it's gutsy--what if he winds up on the bottom of the list? And what's he going to do about it if he's on the top? Go "Nyaah nyaah nyaah" to folks who are lower on the list? Or try to convince you all that just because he does a good job for me that you'll be just as pleased even if you have a completely different set of expectations? I think it's time we came off our high horses, folks. Yes, our vendors are in competition with each other. Yes, they are looking for ways to make more money. So what? If they can make more money by selling a better product then I'm happy for them because, if I'm smart, I will be better served. Over and out.... (3) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon Mar 23 23:04:47 GMT 1992 From: Barry Fast Subject: Academic Book Center survey I would like to comment on the discussion on ACQNET about our survey. We think it is important to learn as much as we can about the expectations of the library market. We have all sorts of internal ways of quantifying our perfor- mance, but that is only half the picture. How do you feel about our service? What do you expect from a vendor? Are we improving in your eyes, or are there things you would like to see us do better? One way of getting this information is through personal visits to your libraries. In sales calls librarians often share details of their vendor relations with us. This helps us formulate our policies and do a better job. But even this information is filtered, because sales reps, with the best of intentions, interpret and summarize a discussion in their sales call report. A survey, where customers share their views with us directly, is just one more way of gathering information to help us manage our company better. In putting the survey together we were mindful of the ethical ramifications. We did not ask respondents to compare discounts. I agree with those ACQNET commentators who felt that would have been unethical, and that is why we steered clear of that issue. We specifically avoided asking for any informa- tion on specific library-vendor relationships; instead we focused on service issues. How do people value different service elements? Is delivery speed more important that overall fulfillment? What plans do we need to make on electronic interfaces with libraries? In my experience these are all issues that librarians discuss vigorously at conventions. Our view of a survey is that it gives existing and potential customers a chance to tell us what is important to them. It is our responsibility as vendors to your community to offer services that you think are important. A survey helps us identify your needs and desires. It also points out any weaknesses we have in relation to our competitors, and it can serve as a partial guide (along with sales reps reports and our own experience as managers) to put our resources where the market thinks we should be going. On the issue of confidentiality and anonymity, I am afraid you will just have to take our word on this. We really do not care to know which individuals were responding, and we enclosed blank postage paid envelopes to insure this. We would never use uncomplimentary information about a competitor to gain favor with a customer. It is not only wrong; it is stupid. Before we mailed this survey we tested it in interviews with librarians. We wanted to know if it was clear, concise, easy to fill out, and if anyone found it uncomfortable or offensive. Some people did feel uncomfortable rating our performance vis a vis our competitors, and that is why I stated in the cover letter that we respect that feeling. People who did not want to share that information are well within their rights to have left that section blank. We appreciated any thoughts or ideas that were reflected in their response to the rest of the survey. We put our name on the survey and I put my name on the cover letter. We wanted you to have that information precisely because we wanted you to make the choice, according to your own feelings and with the full knowledge of who was surveying you, to either fill out the survey or not. Our thanks to everyone who participated. We don't know who you are, but we appreciate your taking the time to give us your views. I think that any service oriented company should do a "reality check" with its customers to find out what they want, what they think of us, and how we stack up against the other fine book sellers in the library world. (4) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1992 10:35:19 HST From: Thelma Diercks Subject: Handling Requests for NYP Books Requests for books which are not-yet-published, particularly for which the selector possesses a CIP record, present a dilemma. If you wait to order after verification of publication is established, there is the possibility that the book may be out-of-print or otherwise not available when the order is finally placed. How do you handle orders for books which are NYP? 1. Order the book and encumber the funds indefinitely? 2. Try to determine in-print status by checking OCLC? By contacting the publisher/vendor? Order the book only after establishing in-print status? 3. If the status NYP is established, do you return the order to the selector or do you hold the order and check its status periodically? Monthly? Quarterly? 4. When, after periodic checking and finding no change in status, do you return the request to the selector? A year? Never? (5) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 92 13:57:18 EST From: Jeanne-Elizabeth Combs Acquisitions User Group Formation Meeting June 18, 1992 10:00-12:00 PALINET Conference Room 3401 Market Street Suite 262 Philadelphia PA 19104 for further info and registration form call Jeanne-Elizabeth Combs, 1-800-233-3401 Cost: free. Purpose: to provide a forum for the discussion of issues pertaining to the acquisitions function. Precise focus, meeting schedule, etc. to be decided at the meeting. PALINET, the OCLC Regional Network for the Philadelphia area, is facilitating the formation of this group due to interest from our membership. Focus, structure, officers, dues (if any) etc. will be decided by the group attending the first formation meeting. I will serve as facilitator for this first meeting, and PALINET will continue to offer its conference room as a meeting site if that is agreeable to the group. (6) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 92 07:29:44 EST From: Judith C. Eannarino Subject: Job announcement Position Available: Selector/Cataloger with knowledge of Japanese. The National Library of Medicine has an opening for a Librarian/Technical Information Specialist, GS-1410/12 - 7/9/11/12. Applicants must possess the ability to read and comprehend materials written about biomedical subjects in the Japanese language. Additional educational and experience requirements for each grade level are found in the official vacancy announcement. U.S. citizen- ship is required. The incumbent will perform descriptive and subject cataloging and classifica- tion, select monographs for the NLM collection, and perform other duties as assigned. Closing date is 4/20/92. NLM is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Please request Vacancy Announcement 91-29-LO-88 from: Marilyn Apolito, Personnel Office, Room 2N05, National Library of Medicine, Bldg 38, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20894 Tel. (301) 496-4943 E-mail queries can be directed to Judith Eannarino . ******* END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 2, No. 41 ****** END OF FILE *******