[Original posting on this topic appeared in COLLDV-L no. 1585 and is
reproduced below; the responses follow it.]
From: donna.canevari_at_usask.ca
The University of Saskatchewan Libraries has formed a committee to once
again look at the idea/possiblity/feasibility [or not] of an acquisitions
allocation formula.
I would appreciate hearing from other univeristy libraries on this
issue--especially if you have a formula, have recently considered a
formula, but decided not to implement one, or have recently insituted a
formula.
Thank you for you help.
Donna Canevari de Paredes
Collections Librarian
University of Saskatchewan Libraries
3 Campus Drive
Saskatoon, SK S7N5A4
tel: (306) 966-5970
fax: (306) 966-6040
canevari_at_sklib.usask.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) From: "Lauren Corbett" <corbettl_at_Rex.queens.edu>
I have not used an allocation formula, but found Clip Note #22,
_Allocation Formulas in Academic Libraries_. Association of College
and Research Libraries, Chicago, 1995. ISBN 0838978126
Lauren Corbett
Collection Management Librarian
Everett Library, Queens College
Charlotte, NC
........................
Depository Library #0451
Phone: 704 337-2278 Fax: 704 337-2517
corbettl_at_rex.queens.edu
(2)-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: Amos Lakos <aalakos_at_library.uwaterloo.ca>
I have been looking at formula budgeting for some time, but
didn't implement anything for a number of reasons - most of
them useless.
We decided not to use the word formula - use the word model -
people are afraid of formulas.
We wanted a limited number of variables - less that eight. Formulas
can become very elaborate, however, the more elaborate they become,
the more difficult it is toi gather data and to explain the formula.
As I remember, we wanted to use the following varialbles:
1. nr. of books (ALL) (serials) published in the US in a given year - by
subject (more accurately adjusted to our fund structure)
2. average unit cost of book or serial by fund
3. Number of undergraduates
4. Number of Graduates
5. NUmber of Faculty
6. NUmber of teaching units per department
- you may also use income from research and weight it
We decided to stay away from local use statistics, because they
are not objective numbers and are not accurate (we think).
The formula is based on the realtionship between SUPPLY (amount
of items published in a given year) and between demand ( number of
clients) - and all this adjusted by some kind of priority formula that
the university may want to add ( this priority formula may be entered
into the weighting of the clients).
The advantage of this formula is that it is simple and logical and it can
be explained to faculty. The disadvantage is that it is relatively difficult
to get accurate data about the suppley figures - number of publications
and then adjust them to the local departmental structure.
However, the formula may be adjusted to a faculty model ( much wider
subject breakdown) - so that the formula is then faculty based ( or any
other bigger campus unit). This may be more workable.
In the end, you need some buy-in from staff and plan to explain the
formula to faculty.
Amos Lakos - Coordinator, Management Information Services
University of Waterloo Library
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
Phone: (519) 888-4567, ext. 2279
Fax: (519) 888-4320
E-mail: aalakos_at_library.uwaterloo.ca
Homepage: http://www.lib.uwaterloo.ca/~aalakos/index.html
Received on Tue Sep 30 1997 - 16:05:27 EDT