1. ILL Workflow Assessment
Eric Robinson - WiLS

2. Reasons for consulting
 People are curious - like an 'outsiders' look
 Directors want to know work is being done
well
 Make the day-to-day work easier and
efficient
 Recommendations for service opportunities

3. Consulting Process
1) Get questions and concerns to answer in workflow analysis from the partner library.
2) Write up „Goals and Expectations‟ and make sure that questions above are
addressed.
3) Modify survey and early assessment appropriately for the specific borrowing partner.
4) Send „Goals and Expectations‟ for approval and give early partner library „to-do‟ list
of questions and survey(s) to complete.
5) Set up site visit team and date.
6) Decide on the style of final report – tooled only for a director or for an entire staff?
7) Both partner and WiLS work on their separate pre-visit tasks.
8) Choose appropriate interview questions.
9) Site visit.
10) Build report – use Goals and Expectations as skeleton of report.
11) Present report.

4. ILL Assessment checklist
See Handout
The checklist is a checklist from STARS/RUSA
for their Best Practices 'star' list
Gives us the groundwork for an ILL operation

5. Goals and expectations
Summary of Library and ILL Service
Description of staffing, ILL Budget
Software and Automation
Consortial Borrowing and Comm. Doc. Del.
Copyright and Licensing
Service Priorities for patrons
Measuring productivity and evaluating services
Future services and challenges

6. Site visit
There are usually early nerves
We are there to make the day-to-day life of
librarians easier
The day is meant to: explore the goals and
expectation questions, see how the work is
done in its element, and learn the
constraints on the current workflow

7. Snippets of the results - reporting
Staffing
Staffing for the ILL department is currently at a bare bones level.
Further in the report, it is illustrated that the lending volume is
continuing to rise while the borrowing volume has plateaued in
the past few fiscal years. If the volume continues to steadily
rise, mainly as a result of Rapid requests, immediate staffing
additions should be considered to maintain the quality of the ILL
service. The current professional staff structure should not be
added to if the volume rises. Student staff should be employed
and utilized in more processes for which only staff are currently
responsible. Staff would need to re-tool their internal
documentation to provide ample support for either internal or
cross-departmental student employees.

8. Snippets of the results - reporting
Financial
Two areas of growth are 1) greater use of collection development
funds for ILL purchasing and 2) greater pools of reciprocation. The
use of collection development funds could be considered a pass-
through cost if the borrowing service were allowed to cap direct
purchases at around $15. If the cost-per-unit is controlled, then
the option of reselling book purchases either through an annual
book sale or Better World Books could bring the direct expense of
ILL purchases under $10 per use. (While the reimbursement
through re-sale may be questionable, the direct cost of shipping
loans to the original lender would be avoided in this model.)
“Library A‟s” borrowing service should immediately try to create
reciprocal relationships with the top 10 charging libraries (by
volume of fulfillment). If a small number of these 10 libraries no
longer charged “Library A”, the direct cost of request fulfillment
will go down further.

9. End results of visits
Improved staffing and equipment support
Highlight steps towards changes and new services
Reduce turnaround time
Illustrate technology possibilities
Create a contact for future support