...
Even though the two institutions do similar kinds of work in comparable fashion, there are significant differences in receiving workflows that are unique to each University. As was mentioned in the summary of staffing and expertise at the beginning of this report, Cornell has several workflows established for fastcating material upon receipt ; and Columbia has 1 FTE in the OAR unit with 35% of their responsibilities devoted to cataloging. There are also differences in what each receiving department handles. Columbia receives a significant number of DVDs and serial back issues, whereas Cornell handles government documents and receives and checks-in current serials. Librarians in MAS approve invoices in Voyager before routing on for processing in the acquisitions accounting department, whereas Cornell's unit supervisors route pending invoices to their respective accounting department for approval in Voyager.
...
Columbia and Cornell's receiving departments experience the same types of dependencies and limitations in day-to-day operations. Both departments are dependent on selectors for the timely review and selection of approval material by selectors in order books to facilitate invoice payment of invoices and catalog cataloging of material. Establishing EDI connections with vendors occurs in IT departments outside of the receiving units (LITO for Columbia and Batch Processing for Cornell). The loading of bibliographic records for approval material at Columbia also occurs in LITO and the Book in Hand unit must wait until the records load before it can prepare material for review. Cornell is reliant on their accounting department to approve pending invoices in Voyager. The processing of invoices for approval material is limited by internal accounting constraints at Columbia.
...