Pros Cons
RM
- Record loads into III - requires considerable attention for week every month. wear and tear on body and soul. Impact on patrons (updated holdings, public display inaccurate and slow), staff (stress and ability to focus on other work) 10-20 hours per month. add a second Sersol load and still save time.
- License, resource, contacts information already in knowledgebase for many resources - III system is all hand entry for resource and license records.
Selectors will be able to access the system with relatively little training to view title lists, license terms, contaqct information. As a web based tool, this will be possible remoptely (during a conference). III system has limited simultaneous connections and requires considerable training to gety new users up to speed.
COUNTER
- Annual harvesting of usage statistics - This will be mostly automated - SUSHI compliant resources each month, Non-SUSHI resources 2x yearly. System alerts us when changes are coming, usage harvesting data is out of date, - Sally Lockwood currently spends 12 weeks at about 75% of her time to harvest. If we can recover 50-70% of this time to handle onyl the more complicated issues and updating the system, considerable effort is recovered.
- Selectors will be able to access the system and make custom consolidated reports. TRhis is poissible, but complicated in the current "system"
RM-CE
- Platform changes and other resource maintenance - One person/process can make the changes for both institutions when both CULs have content in the same collections.
- Alerts monitoring
- Coimparison of e-collections will be considerably easier. This will help with collection development decvisions, shared workflow.
Make a specific recommendation on whether to implement the Consortial Version of Serials Solutions at both institutions or hold off on integrating e-resource management and data migration until we have a shared LMS;
...