2. Talis Aspire Digitised Content
(TADC)
Measuring the Value – 6 Months
on……
Dorothy Atherton, Services Manager - Resource Acquisitions and Supply
05 March 2014
2
3. Looking Back……..
Struggling to meet
KPIs
www.karipatterson.com 2012
No online request
system
Documents stored on
VLE
No integration with
Resource Lists
General dissatisfaction
with service - request
numbers falling
www.crossfitwest.com
05 March 2014
3
4. First impression of TADC……..
TADC allows better use of
staff time
Dxfoundation.orgi 2012
Academics make requests
online through Resource List
Documents integrated and
easily accessible through
Resource Lists
Integration with TARL at the
front end, but divorced at
the back
Control and consistency in
copyright process – sentry
guards access
MOVIECROFT.COM
05 March 2014
4
5. Weighing the Case for TADC
Arguments
for TADC
05 March 2014
Arguments
Against
5
6. Weighing the Case for TADC
Case for TADC
05 March 2014
Case against TADC
6
7. 6 Months on……
Is the impact and value of
TADC starting to live up
to expectation?
05 March 2014
7
8. Increased
functionality in
TADC
Meet KPI more
consistently,
even at busy
times
More documents
available more
easily via
Resource Lists
05 March 2014
Better use of
Staff time
Less risk for the
University
Increased
satisfaction from
academics
More flexible
staff able to
provide a better
service
More requests
made
Increased student satisfaction
8
9. More efficient use of staff
time - expectation
WWW.mevvy.com
– Time spent processing original request
– Time spent scanning and creating clean PDF
– Time spent attaching cover sheet and uploading
133 hours
No saving
– Time spent rolling over at year end
125 hours
– Time spent processing requests ultimately rejected
– Time spent corresponding with academics
50 hours
100 hours
– Time wasted in peaks on troughs of annual
digitisation cycle
05 March 2014
63 hours
475 hours
9
10. More efficient
use of staff
time
www.housingwire.com
•Lost a member of staff
•Work covered within team
•More staff involved in processing requests
•Involvement from and with other teams
•Rollover – yet to be fully tested
05 March 2014
10
11. Compliance with Licence
- expectation
Peterdonoughue.blogspot.com
– Concierge checks against authority sources and applies
rules consistently
– Less decision-making responsibility for staff more possibility
of spreading the work and less need for a digitisation
‘expert’
– TADC is context sensitive
– Structured decisions can be tracked and monitored
– Academics get instant feedback on compliance
– Library staff not the bad guys, and academic staff more
aware of issues
– Sentry controls access to documents stored in the vault
– Gives us more control over digitised content
05 March 2014
11
12. Compliance -Reality
• Decreased risk for the University
• ???????
• Greater general awareness of copyright issues
• Falling in number of rejected requests and requests requiring supply
of further information
• More flexible staff
• Cross-over of staff – DSD on rotas for other teams; more staff
involved with digitisation
• Smoothing of peaks and troughs in service
• Meeting need-by dates consistently – even during busy periods
• Greater job satisfaction??
05 March 2014
12
13. Increased
functionality in
TADC
Meet KPI more
consistently,
even at busy
times
More documents
available more
easily via
Resource Lists
05 March 2014
Better use of
Staff time
Less risk for the
University
Increased
satisfaction from
academics
More flexible
staff able to
provide a better
service
More requests
made
Increased student satisfaction
15
14. Informal feedback from Academic
Staff:
Before TADC
•Complaints about
missing need-by dates
Since October…..
•No complaints
•Confusion about how to
make requests
•Ease of requesting
•Confusion about how to
make the texts
available
•No further input
required from them
•Disappointment in
falling standard
05 March 2014
•Instant response
•General high standard
of service from the
team
16
Back
15. More digitisation requests?
Cumulative Dig. Requests
900
800
700
600
2009-2010
500
2010-2011
2011-2012
400
2012-2013
2013-2014
300
200
100
0
Aug
05 March 2014
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Back
Jan
17
16. Annual Number of Digitisation Requests
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
Average
number of
requests
1500
1000
500
0
2009-2010
05 March 2014
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
18
17. % Requests by School Pre and Post TADC
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
05 March 2014
2011/12
2013/14
19
18. Increased
functionality in
TADC
Meet KPI more
consistently,
even at busy
times
More documents
available more
easily via
Resource Lists
05 March 2014
Better use of
Staff time
Less risk for the
University
Increased
satisfaction from
academics
More flexible
staff able to
provide a better
service
More requests
made
Increased student satisfaction
20
19. Students
• Better service for
academics encourages
better, wider use of
service
• More materials easily
available when and
where required from
within the resource list.
• All digitised materials
available from within
the resource list
05 March 2014
• Greater use of digitised
documents
− Usage Stats
• Increased satisfaction
with the service
− Formal/Informal
feedback
• Increased word of
mouth pressure on
academics to engage
with service - anecdotal
21
20. Views on live requests since October 2013
1,000
750
500
250
0
05 March 2014
22
22. Student Feedback
•Positive but mostly anecdotal
•Reports back from from course committees
•LIBQual score (January 2014):
“Main Texts and Readings for my Work”
2011
Perceived
Mean
05 March 2014
6.85
2014
7.28
SCONUL
7.13
24
23. Increased
functionality in
TADC
Meet KPI more
consistently,
even at busy
times
More documents
available more
easily via
Resource Lists
05 March 2014
Better use of
Staff time
Less risk for the
University
Increased
satisfaction from
academics
More flexible
staff able to
provide a better
service
More requests
made
Increased student satisfaction
25