CMS Committee and Interest Group Reports

Collection Management Section (CMS) Committees

Continuing Education Committee

The committee met with Lesley Brown, from Reference and User Services Association Collection Development and Evaluation Section (RUSA CODES), to discuss a potential co-shared program to be presented at ALA 2013: “Constraints on Collection Development for Public, School, and Academic Libraries.” Lesley has submitted the program proposal to RUSA and hopes to hear a response in July. After Lesley left, the committee discussed the prospective program in more detail and had some suggestions that Karen will pass on to Lesley.

The committee discussed the draft Interest Group FAQ and Betty suggested that a short and free video on the topic be made and posted on the ALA website. Karen took this idea to the Executive Committee meeting.

During the remainder of the meeting the committee brainstormed on ideas for webinars. Karen will forward the list to the Continuing Education Committee.

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee convened at 8 a.m. Members visited the CMS committees until 9 a.m. From 9 to 10 a.m., the Executive Committee met; the meeting included the guests above. From 10:30 to 12 noon, the Executive Committee met with the CMS leaders.

At the 9 a.m. meeting, discussion topics included ALA conference schedule changes, which will start at midwinter 2013. In addition to the changes that will affect all of ALA, some changes will affect CMS specifically: the CMS E-resources Interest Group (IG) will have a new time slot, and the CMS forums will be shortened to one hour. Committee members were asked to send comments on the new schedule. Simpson and Myall reviewed other board actions. CMS executive committee members emphasized the pressing need for allowing committees to hold virtual meetings, and it was noted that this is in agreement with the ALCTS Board plans for Annual 2013.

From 10:30 to noon, the Executive Committee met with CMS leaders. Activities and action items from groups were reviewed. Lightman distributed the ALA 2013 “Roadmap for Change” document, Library Support Staff Classification (LSSC ) update document, the CMS FAQ for Interest Groups (draft prepared by and for CMS), and reviewed upcoming ALCTS/CMS events in Anaheim. ALCTS Board actions and discussions were recapped. The group was referred to “Roadmap for Change” and was asked to consider the proposed revisions to scheduling. It was agreed that the CMS all-committee meetings could start at 9 a.m. rather than the traditional 8 a.m. at Midwinter and Annual, and this recommendation will be forwarded to ALCTS. There was also discussion of the difference between discussion groups and interest groups and how the names might convey different meanings to potential attendees. Finally, a request was made to find out if the ALCTS Board meeting minutes were available to all of the CMS leaders.

Committee chairs provided brief updates and reports of their group’s activities, and suggested action items. Publications recommended that Sudden Selector series editor Helene Williams be credited on each publication, and that this recommendation be taken to the appropriate person/group in ALCTS for further consideration. The Education Committee suggested the possibility of considering development of a short webinar about interest groups, based on the IG FAQ document. Brief reports were given for some of the IGs which had already held their meetings. There was some confusion regarding the IG for Public Libraries, and whether there were two groups with this name, one of which was in conjunction with RUSA CODES. This will be explored further. New IG chairs were announced, as far as this was known. The draft IG FAQ was discussed at length, and revisions made. Lightman will send the revised version to the leaders for final review and discussion, after which the document will be sent to ALCTS IG coordinator Dale Swensen. Lightman presented agenda items for 2012–13 on behalf of Cory Tucker. Items include:

  • Virtual meetings. This issue was raised by the Publications Committee as well. Virtual meetings for future conferences, especially midwinter, were strongly supported by the group.
  • Finalizing the Interest Group (IG) FAQ document.
  • Completing the transition to the new section structure, which includes IG transitions

Lightman passed the virtual gavel to the new leadership. Safley acknowledged the work of Lightman and Williams and asked if there should be a way to honor past chairs formally. General agreement yes, but no action assigned.

Planning Committee

  1. General discussion about the work of transition team as well as work of ALCTS and how to monitor and evaluate the interest groups.
  2. Discussion about the work of the Planning Committee
    Issue: Wasn’t sure how to go forward with evaluation of IGs without a set of criteria and without information the interest groups. Also, not sure who is chairperson of each IG.
    Action item: Request CMS to pass the FAQ.
    Action item: Request list of IGs and chairperson for each IG.
  3. Coordination with Reference and User Services Association Collection Development and Evaluation Section (RUSA CODES)
    Question: How is Planning Committee to work with RUSA-CODES? Is there overlap in mission?
    Action item: Discuss with CMS what Planning Committee is required to do in this regard.
  4. Structure of Planning Committee
    Issue: How to maintain continuity of work and an understanding of committee’s mission?
    Action item: Request from CMS Executive Committee codification of official nomination of Co-Chair or Chair-Elect for following year.

Thoughts added by the absent chair, Dennis Lambert:

  • Thanks to Christine Dulaney for chairing the Planning meeting in my absence.
  • When the FAQ document is finalized, Planning can use evaluation criteria to conduct evaluation of the section interest groups, according to the timing requested by the CMS Executive Committee.
  • Interest groups may only be able to answer some of the evaluation questions. What needs to result from the evaluation is evidence that the IGs are fulfilling a need, have leadership, and meet on a regular basis.
  • In 2012–2013, the Transition Advisory Committee chaired by Joshua Barton continues its work to monitor the evolution of three formerly standing committees into interest groups. After the 2013 Annual conference, Planning Committee needs to pick up the monitoring of these IGs.
  • Continue to keep in touch with the ALCTS division level interest group coordinator, Dale Swensen, to whom questions can be directed.

Publications Committee

Sudden Selector’s Guides. Helene Williams, series editor, provided an update on volumes in the series. The biology and chemistry volumes have been published. Other volumes are in some degree of preparation, and committee members volunteered to read and comment on three of these (children’s literature, English, government information).

The committee discussed new meeting models, and will experiment with a virtual meeting instead of meeting in person at ALA Midwinter 2013. The committee accomplishes a lot between meetings, so there is generally only an hour of business to cover at meetings. The committee will meet 9–10 a.m., instead of 8–10 a.m., at ALA Annual 2013.

There has generally been light activity on Collection Connection: The Collection Management and Development Blog. The committee discussed strategies to make the blog more successful. After the conference, Steven Harris, the blog administrator, recruited several contributors, who will hopefully write regularly.

The third annual research forum, “Emerging Research in Collection Management and Development,” was held on Sunday, June 24, 4–5:30 p.m., with two excellent presentations:

  • Kristin E. Martin, Sandra L. De Groote, and Deborah D. Blecic “Comparison of Citation Use Patterns to Link Resolver and Vendor Statistics in Journals in the Health Sciences Fields.”
  • David Beales “Modeling the Cost of Abandoning the Big Deal: A Case Study from the UK.”

Transition Advisory Committee

We reviewed activity since Midwinter Meeting, including sustained communication with the Administration, E-Resources, and Assessment interest groups. We heard a report on the meeting of the Administration of Collection Development Interest Group. We reviewed items to communicate to succeeding interest group chairs, as both Administration and E-Resources are changing hands. We examined the CMS IG FAQ document, in draft form. Much of the work to be planned between Annual 2012 and Midwinter 2013 will be determined by the final form of the FAQ document and the questions it provides answers to. One action item is to track the development of the FAQ document, drawing IG chair attention to it once it’s complete.

Collection Management Section (CMS) Interest Groups

Administration of Collection Development Interest Group

The IG’s goal was to have a lively discussion about what kinds of skills we, as collection managers, need that we never learned in library school. We had four speakers who talked for 15 minutes each and then answered questions for the remainder of the time. The speakers were:

  • Shelley Ekeroth, Collection Development Coordinator, County of LA Public Library
  • Charlene Rue, Director of Collection Development, Brooklyn Public Library
  • Geoffrey Little, Collections Librarian, Concordia University Library in Montreal
  • Douglass Black, Collection Development Librarian, Northern Michigan University

The moderator was Peggy Murphy from the Los Angeles Public Library.

Chief Collection Development Officers of Large Research Libraries

The CCDO Interest Group meeting included presentations and discussion topics. Please see topic list below. Thirty-two members were present; approximately thirty nonmembers also attended.

Topics included:

  • University accessibility policies: E-resources and compliance with federal law
  • E-books and cooperative collection development
  • The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine: to link or copy/harvest?
  • arXiv update
  • Financial support models for open access initiatives
  • The uncertain world of videos: preservation issues and collection development for research libraries
  • Distance education, massive open online courses, content, and online course support: the role of the library?

Collection Development Librarians of Academic Libraries Interest Group

The Collection Development Librarians of Academic Libraries Interest Group continued its midwinter discussion about transforming collections. Three panelists: Head of Acquisitions Keith Powell, University of California, Irving; Head of Collections Jill Emery, Portland State University; and Executive Director Jennifer Younger, Catholic Research Resources Alliance shared their practical experience and perspectives on patron-driven acquisitions, e-book approval plans, collaborative collection development, and building shared subject-based digital portals. Following the panel presentations, the group discussed these and other collections trends.

A very brief business meeting was held; we introduced our incoming chair, Cara List, who is the art and architecture librarian at University of Oregon.

Collection Development Issues for the Practitioner Interest Group

Kay Downey and Rick Wiggins of Kent State University made a presentation on “Selection Manager”—a locally developed centralized system that manages the communication and workflow in support of electronic resource decision-making. Kay presented a compelling case for the need of software support for this library function, given the complexity and variety of formats that make up offers from content providers and other market players, the variety of stakeholders in the library’s decision-making process, and the dollars involved. She and Rick Wiggins provided a detailed description of the system and record components, and Rick discussed the technical environment in which the software was developed. Kay concluded by reviewing the principle benefits for Kent State of this helpful software tool, including improved control over the review of new e-resource offers, automated communication, coordinated workflow, and transparency of the process to interested parties. There was a lively Q&A at the end of the presentation with general agreement that e-resource management systems should include these capabilities.

After the presentation, a short business meeting took place. Josephine Crawford solicited volunteers for chairing the IG next year and discussion topics in 2013.

Collection Evaluation and Assessment Interest Group

Approximately 30 people attended the Collection Evaluation and Assessment Interest Group’s meeting in Anaheim. The following four speakers who described collection assessment projects that were quite varied in nature:

  • “Evaluating Big Deals,” Beth Bernhardt, Electronic Resources Librarian, University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
  • “Using User Data Analysis to Inform Decision Making,” John Lenahan, associate vice president, Institutional Participation and Outreach, JSTOR.
  • “An Analysis of EBook Equivalent Coverage at The College of New Jersey Library,” Forrest Link, acquisitions librarian, TCNJ Library, The College of New Jersey.
  • “How to Win Friends and Relocate Materials: The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Collection Moves,” Heath Martin, director of collections, University of Kentucky.

There were a few questions and comments. It was announced that the IG needs volunteers for leading the group for next year. A few attendees expressed that they hoped the group would continue. Next year’s leadership is in progress. There is a volunteer for vice-chair and two members have been contacted, inviting them to be chair or vice-chair. The goal is to line up a chair/vice-chair and maybe even a third volunteer so the future of this IG is ensured for the next three years.

Collection Management in Public Libraries Interest Group

Agenda discussion: E-vendors: what’s new

  • Monique and Jordana are going to work with Bibliotecha where they will work to bring the Douglas County experience to public libraries, making it possible for them to host their own content. They’re planning to roll this out in 2013, so look for announcements soon. This is intriguing for those of us who have been looking at Douglas County as an inspiration.
  • Los Angeles Public Library (LAPL) went to Axis360 Saturday. They’re hoping to add Adobe Digital Editions in a few weeks. Records are in the catalog.
  • Oak Park has 3M. Charlene wants to know if there’s enough content. Bleue says no. It’s a very good experience for the user, but they haven’t had time to work with the library side of things. Webinars aren’t reliably scheduled.
  • Queens is using their OverDrive invoices to create catalog records. They wrote a program to use the spreadsheet to generate records and they’re willing to share it. This is a great idea, Jane Jacobs is the contact.
  • Hoopla (Midwest Tape) is looking at an October release. They first had it ready for mobile devices and are going to do a web interface too. They also have a model like Freading, pay per use/patron driven acquisitions.


  • Challenges stem more from our data than their system, and they are continually improving it and looking for feedback.
  • E-books, floating, mobile and world languages were priorities that came up, and they are also looking at working on getting daily data rather than monthly.

WTCox for periodicals?
LAPL just switched after 40 years with EBSCO. They have more than 70 libraries. Cox gave them a really good deal, by a large margin. They allow electronic claiming. It’s going to be better. If you have any problems with them, let Peggy know. Brooklyn is also going to them, after EBSCO ignoring them for years (example: the selection of subscriptions went from branches to central and they didn’t catch on to this). Cox seems really agile, willing to go out to look for a title they don’t carry so they can carry it. We might need to revisit this. District of Columbia Public Library (DCPL) went out to bid and isn’t happy with EBSCO customer service right now. The company is reorganizing and moving and not doing well.

World Languages newspapers, KCLS uses NewspapersDirect from ProQuest for same day printing of international titles. It’s like a physical version of the PressDisplay database.

Is anyone reducing their periodicals budgets? Yes, some, up to 10 percent. Brooklyn reduced serials by 50 percent and reduced print reference almost down to nothing. This was done to make room for e-books. Some discussion of Zinio. It’s priced exorbitantly, and can’t yet replace a physical collection. Robin noticed the company is looking for a buyer, so it might be good to hold off on making that choice just now.

  • Cuyahoga County is launching RDO soon. It looks pricey right now, and no benefit to libraries.
  • Everyone is still buying audio books. Elissa and Anne were on a panel about audio books.
  • Compare spending to percentage of circulation. This might be a good idea.
  • VHS is still circulating. We haven’t bought them in seven years or more, and they’re still circulating. LAPL libraries add them when patrons donate them.
  • People have Freegal and like it. They have some promotional challenges. Patrons don’t really know what it is. LAPL has it on the front of the webpage and has 4,000 downloads a month.
  • Free Library of Philadelphia is using Freading. They don’t have HarperCollins, they don’t have Random House, but they do have lots of smaller publishers, including Kensington.
  • Naperville (IL) circulates Blu-ray. They charge for circulation, and it generates $200,000 per year. Two years ago when they started, they didn’t really circulate much, but now they are circulating on a par with DVD.

Pat French of Multnomah County (OR) is retiring.

  • Evansville-Vanderburgh (IN) will have two collection development positions open in the next six months.
  • LAPL is getting a new director soon. Interim Management staff who have been in their positions for two years will have the opportunity to apply to their positions.

How do we organize our workflows? We are having opportunities for reorganization and restructuring every time someone retires. Where do we work in social media? We have to move from book delivery to book discovery. Robin is over Web, Marketing, and Collections now and that’s revolutionary, those are generally separate. They are grouping things that touch the customer together, and grouping things that don’t touch the customer together. Don’t let them outsource tech services, make yourselves indispensable, make it clear that your services are connected to patrons in the eyes of your leadership.

Dayton Metro collection development staff do a lot of readers advisory services with lists and reviews on the web page and so on. They’re current, what they’re excited about this week, for front line staff. Brooklyn wasn’t able to maintain that due to workload issues, although they do manage the readers advisory pages of the website.

Much discussion about marketing versus collection development, in terms of promoting titles to the public without the collection being able to support it. Marketing should report to collection development! EVERYTHING should report to collection development?

Jamie of Baltimore County Public Library said they’re working on having all the things cross pollinate, something on twitter points to the blog and the blog points to the book lists.

DCPL loses 75 percent of urban fiction they buy, and are net lenders for ILL in urban fiction. LAPL put out a big collection of urban fiction and it had to be turned into a paperback collection because it all went away. It indicates the potential need for more.

Much discussion of labeling and sections and arrangements of collections. Staff love labels. Patrons love or hate labels. It can really go either way. Software called Bartender (a cataloging tool) can print a little picture on the spine label based on collection code concepts.