ACQNET v6n023 (August 29, 1996) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v6n023 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 6, No. 23, August 29, 1996 ======================================== (1) FROM: Eleanor Cook, Editor, ACQNET SUBJECT: End of Summer Report for ACQNET (76 lines) (2) FROM: Richard Jasper SUBJECT: Publishers' Telemarketers (32 lines) (3) FROM: Waldomiro de Castro Santos SUBJECT: Acquisitions manual vs. Acquisitions Policy (44 lines) (4) FROM: Julia Robinson SUBJECT: Utilizing Electronic Resources for Acquisitions (24 lines) (1)--------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eleanor Cook, Editor, ACQNET Subject: End of the Summer report from ACQNET This summer has just flown by. For months I've been getting replies to my questions posed at the end of May. Is ACQNET doing well the way it is? What should we change, if anything? I would like to thank everyone who responded. I am sorry I could not respond personally to everyone who sent me a message. I did not get near 1600 replies, but more came in than ever have before -- 60 some, including the editorial board members. Many people asked not be have their replies posted, so I will not post any, though I will quote from some in the next issue. The bottom line, from what I hear, is don't fix what is not broken -- keep on keepin' on. However, there was a continual thread of feeling that yes, we would like to see more substantial, philosophical contributions on occasion -- we just don't have time to read them. Let me give you an example. Over the summer there was a fascinating and long-winded conversation on SERIALST about journal pricing and publisher practices. It was really interesting. However, it heated up while I was out of town and I had to save much of it for when I returned and then I had so much e-mail to sort through that I just never could get a chance to read it all. I've saved most of it, but will I ever get back to it? No telling, but it was an important conversation. After thinking about this and discussing it with Editorial Board members and other colleagues, here is a proposal: if anyone would like to create a document of a substantial length (more than 300 lines) that addresses some aspect of acquisitions librarianship or other related and cogent topic, feel free to submit it to ACQNET. Cynthia Coulter will serve as the editor for these items. They will be placed on ACQWeb and an ACQflash will announce their presence. What kind of publication would this be? You define it. It could be something rambling with a need for more definition -- a place where the author could get feedback from colleagues. It could be a proposal for a more formal article to later be published in print. This way people can go look at it when they want to, and it would be a permanent part of the ACQNET/AcqWeb collection. In the meantime, we will continue to take short questions, moderate length discussion and reports from meetings, etc. and post them on ACQNET. ACQflashes will continue to be used for job announcements, meeting announcements, and so forth. In July, at ALA in New York, I attended a really interesting PVLR (ALCTS Publisher-Vendor-Librarian Relations Committee) open forum where publishers and vendors talked about how they are using the web for advertising and reaching out to end-users and librarians. There was some talk of creating a publishers' listserve so they could talk about these marketing ideas, but they said, no, they wanted to talk to their customers. They cannot talk to the competition, so they say. I would welcome publishers and vendors to ask marketing questions on ACQNET, just don't attempt to sell us specific products. There has been a little bit of this on ACQNET, but not much. How do librarians feel about this? Could we use ACQNET as a forum of exchange of ideas? Please see Richard Jasper's posting in this issue -- I think the questions he raises about telemarketers need replies from publishers as well as librarians. In return, we could provide publishers some rational marketing ideas that instead of irritating us, could help them sell products and get us the materials we really need in our libraries. I welcome postings on this topic. I went through all the replies I received over the summer and I am putting together a special issue (coming next) to just summarize these responses and pull out some interesting quotes and themes. I wish I could post them all in their entirety but no one would read it all, even though most are highly interesting. There are many shy subscribers who do not want to post publicly. I have to say that EVERY PERSON'S posting was articulate and worth sharing. There wasn't a one that wasn't worthy of ACQNET's general atmosphere. I would suspect that there are plenty of other lurkers who have great things to say if they only had time and inclination. So, stay tuned to part two of this summary, in the next issue, being composed with the hope of getting it out before Labor Day. ACQNET almost had a major catastrophe this week; my home computer's hard drive failed and I almost lost a lot of data, most of which was backed up, but not this recently composed issue. Fortunately it was saved! (2)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 12:01:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Jasper (Emory Univ.) Subject: What's the deal? -- Publishers' Telemarketers Any more a week doesn't go by in which I don't receive at least two or three phone calls from telemarketers trying to sell me books. It used to be that just a few publishers employed telemarketing folks, but now it seems very common and everyone seems to be getting in on the action. My problem with telemarketers is twofold: (1) They're barking up the wrong tree. I don't make selection decisions and even if I did I would much rather have a brochure, a flyer, or even a fax in front of me while making my decision. (2) Most of them don't seem to know anything about academic libraries and in a lot of cases they don't appear to know much about their products. I've heard 8 year olds make more knowledgeable sounding pitches for Girl Scout Cookies. I suppose it must be working or publishers wouldn't be doing it. Or would they? Do other folks like receiving these telemarketing calls? Thanks... Richard P. Jasper, Head Acquisitions Department Emory University General Libraries Atlanta, Georgia, USA 30322-2870 Ph: 404-727-0122 // Fax: 404-727-0053 // Email: librpj@emory.edu (3)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 02 Aug 1996 14:36:58 -0300 (GRNLNDST) From: Waldomiro de Castro Santos Vergueiro (Univ. of Sao Paulo) Subject: Acquisitions manual vs. Acquisitions Policy I am writing a book about acquisitions. It is being written in collaboration with a librarian who has several years experience working on acquisitions. I am a lecturer in the Dept. of Librarianship and Documentation of the University of Sao Paulo and have been doing research on collection development for more than 13 years. In writing the book together, we find it easier to agree in some aspects of acquisitions work than in others. I suppose that is natural. One of the aspects we have found difficult to agree upon is the definition and characteristics of the acquisitions manual and the acquisitions policy. I think that the acquisitions manual is related only to the details of the operation: how to make an order, how to pay for the items, how to organize a list for quotation, etc., not touching aspects like budget allocation or guidelines for receiving gifts. Regarding the acquisitions policy, we have found it very hard to specify those policies that are related exclusively to acquisitions. For example: establishing priorities for acquiring the materials in accordance to subjects, courses, research field - is this acquisition or selection policy? So, those are my doubts for the group, hoping that you can give me good insights on the subject: 1. How would you define an acquisitions manual? What would you include in it? 2. What is the acquisitions policy? Which would be the subjects included in it - or rather, the subjects exclusively in the domain of acquisitions' activities and not in selection or collection development? I hope the questions are clear to all. Waldomiro C. S. Vergueiro Lecturer Dept. of Librarianship and Documentation University of Sao Paulo (4)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 04:36:17 -0700 From: Julia Robinson (Ohio University) Subject: Utilizing Electronic Resources for Acquisitions I'd greatly appreciate hearing about the experiences and procedures that other academic libraries have found to be effective in utilizing the Web for ordering books and other formats. We're working on streamlining our acquisition process via electronic resources. Having researched the possibilities available on the Web, we're finding that there are some roadblocks to implementing direct ordering. As we must work within the structure of Ohio University's financial department (as a regional campus in a multicampus system), there seem to be "paper" requirements which almost cancel out the advantages of electronic possibilities. Our integrated online system is III (Innovative Interfaces Inc.). The University of Washington has a splendid web page dealing with the III system, but, until the enhancements of Release 10 are realized, we are not currently able to fully utilize the acquisitions module - but must go through the main campus. Thanking those of you who can come to our aid in advance. Julia Robinson robinsonju@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 6, No. 23 ****** END OF FILE ******