Acquisitions Standards
Authors: Alison Brandt, Rebecca Green
INTRODUCTION
The acquisition process has been defined as consisting of four main areas:
submission of orders for checking and order placement, bibliographic checking,
ordering, and follow-up. The process of selection was felt to be distinct from
the process of acquisition, although specific aspects of selection can overlap
with the submission of orders in Berkeley's current environment. The process
of selection merits its own set of standards. Similarly, although follow-up
is here defined as a part of the acquisition process, claiming and receipt of
ordered material was felt to be part of monograph and serial processing, separate
workflows covered by their own sets of standards.
The standards below apply to anyone whose work falls within the four main areas
of acquisition. Depending on the ordering workflow of a particular subject area,
they may apply to selectors as well as to technical service staff in branches
or the Technical Services Department. These standards cover basic and essential
elements of the acquisition process. Some branches also carry out optional procedures,
such as maintaining on-order files, which have not been covered by these standards.
1. SUBMISSION OF ORDERS FOR CHECKING AND ORDER PLACEMENT
Introduction
In the Library's current configuration, submission of orders for checking and
keying can be done by a selector as part of the selection process, or can be
done by technical services staff who pass along order requests from the selector
to the Collection Core Services Division. These standards have been written
with the full range of order submission options in mind. In either case, the
timeliness with which orders can be submitted for further processing is directly
dependent upon the timeliness and methodology of the selection process.
We strongly urge the establishment of standards for selection, without which it is much
more difficult to establish quantifiable standards for order submission.
Manner of performance
Establishing a fundamental bibliographic citation (author, title, imprint,
edition, volumes wanted, and series if possible) accurate enough to identify
material is the responsibility of the individual or unit submitting the order.
Timeliness
- Timely submission of orders is dependent upon timely selection.
- Prompt order submission is crucial for urgently-needed materials. Submission
of these orders should be given first priority.
- Pre-publication titles can undergo changes in bibliographic data and/or
in publication schedule before material is actually published. Orders submitted
on the basis of pre-publication data may result in funds liened for long periods
during the fiscal year. Bibliographic checking can become obsolete as citations
evolve.
- When the fiscal year is half over, enough orders should be submitted to
lien half of an area's monographic allocation. Enough orders should be submitted
to lien an area's entire monographic allocation by the announced deadline
for order submission at the end of the fiscal year.
Quality
The bibliographic and publication data supplied should be as complete and accurate
as possible, although full bibliographic checking is not required.
Effectiveness in use of resources
Supplying duplicate or excess information on order requests (i.e., addresses
of major publishers) should be avoided, as it constitutes unnecessary work.
Methods of performance
- Follow order submission procedures described in Section I.A.1 of the Branch
Processing Manual ("Ordering of New Materials"), and Section I.A.1, Supplement
2 ("Alternative Order Procedures without Order Cards"). Utilization of the
alternative procedures is strongly encouraged.
- Select the most efficient method of order submission, based on available
staffing, selection method, and quality of initial citations.
- As time and staffing permit, bibliographic checking on orders can be done
by the submitting unit.
Quantity
The number of orders submitted should be based on an awareness of the amount
of money available at that point of the fiscal year. Orders submitted to the
Collection Core Services Division will be returned unplaced when monographic
funds are spent out.
2. BIBLIOGRAPHIC CHECKING
Introduction
Historically, rates for either unwanted duplication of material or failed orders
resulting directly from poor bibliographic checking have never been established
for the Library, as no adequate means of determining such rates exist.
The goal of bibliographic checking is to establish accurate bibliographic citations
and holdings for every title. We estimate that an error rate of less than 5%
should be maintained by staff with experience and training in bibliographic
checking. Staff who check titles and also receive materials for the same location
are more likely to see the success, failure, or duplication of orders resulting
from their checking.
Manner of performance
- Establishing a correct bibliographic citation which can be used to check
for duplication in Berkeley's holdings, and to procure material from suppliers,
is the responsibility of the individual or unit completing pre-order bibliographic
checking.
- Pre-order bibliographic checking can be completed either by the unit submitting
the order, or by the Collection Core Services Division.
Timeliness
- The Collection Core Services Division checks rush orders within one to
two working days of receipt. Checking on all other orders is completed by
the Collection Core Services Division within a month of receipt.
- Pre-publication data can undergo changes before material is actually published,
rendering any initial bibliographic checking obsolete and increasing the risk
of involuntary duplication.
- Bibliographic checking for duplication performed more than a mont before
ordering may also become outdated due to subsequent orders or additions of
material (e.g. gifts, etc.) by other units.
Quality
When establishing a bibliographic citation, the following elements must be
accurately determined by consulting publisher's information, existing Berkeley
or UC system records, LC cataloging cards, OCLC and/or RLIN: author(s) or issuing
bodies, title, imprint, edition, series (including volume number if applicable).
For serials, publication frequency and current status must also be determined.
Non-print publication formats (i.e. CD-ROMs or electronic publications) should
be specified.
If duplication needs to be monitored or avoided, Berkeley's holdings of a given
title should be accurately and comprehensively determined, regardless of whether
the item in question is cataloged as a monograph, as a serial, or differently
according to location.
Effectiveness in use of resources
- Must be able to search Gladis for records which exactly match citations
in hand, including monographs, serials, MVMs, and serial material cataloged
separately. Must be able to interpret location, call number, and volume/copy
information. Must be able to distinguish between on-order, catalogued, and
withdrawn material. When monographic titles belong to a series, must be able
to determine whether we have an active order for the series.
- Must be able to search OCLC, RLIN, and Melvyl for records which exactly
match citations in hand. Must understand MARC tags for author(s), title, imprint,
series, and former and future titles.
- Must be skilled enough in searching the World Wide Web to find publishers'
and vendors' web sites and search them for currently available publications.
- Must be skilled enough in time management to balance the pursuit of an
elusive citation against the need to complete a checking assignment in a timely
way with adequate information.
Methods of performance
- Title checking in bibliographic utilities can be batched for efficiency.
- Gladis and OCLC are routinely used for holdings and citation verification.
Melvyl, RLIN, and publishers' information in electronic or printed catalogs
should be consulted exceptionally, as needed. Telephone correspondence with
publishers or suppliers should be considered a last resort.
- Bibliographic verification on OCLC and record creation in Innopac can be
combined by using the download feature from the hardwired OCLC machine in
the Technical Services Department.
Quantity
Approximately 60 citations per hour can be checked when consulting a bibliographic
utility. This figure can vary significantly in either direction, depending on
the difficulty of the citations involved and whether or not records are being
downloaded into Innopac at the same time.
3. ORDERING
Introduction
The ordering process (distinct from the receiving process) can be considered
complete from a technical services point of view when orders have been entered
into Innopac or a vendor system. In the case of direct purchase, the ordering
process is complete when materials reach the Library. Vendor evaluation, and
the addition or deletion of vendors from the list currently used by the Library,
is usually done on the librarian or AUL level for vendors with whom we have
major accounts. Some decisions about vendor use may be delegated to a unit such
as the Collection Core Services Division on a case-by-case basis.
Entry of orders into online vendor systems
Manner of performance
- Titles can be ordered online from vendor slips or from a pre-tagged online
list. Units should set up workflows appropriate to their priorities, taking
into consideration turn-around time for ordering, the importance of checking
for duplication, staffing availability, and other local concerns.
Timeliness
- Titles should be ordered according to a priority determined by the selector.
- Depending on the vendor system used, ordering from slips may take longer
or involve more steps after some time has elapsed. Care should be taken to
place orders within the designated preferred time frame.
Quality
- Care should be taken to ensure that only selected material is ordered.
- Immediately report suspected hardware or software "bugs" to relevant systems
personnel.
Effectiveness in use of resources
- Must be skilled in accessing vendor systems through the Internet.
- Staff ordering online through a vendor system should communicate directly
with the appropriate vendor contact to ensure optimal use of the system.
- Online vendor systems are most efficient for ordering large batches of
titles with straightforward citations. It is preferable to order titles with
more difficult citations through the Collection Core Services Division.
Methods of performance
- Online vendor systems should be consulted before titles are submitted for
ordering through Innopac.
- Orders should be batched for maximum ordering efficiency.
- Quantity Not applicable.
- Direct purchase of materials
Manner of performance
- Encourage faculty to submit reserve orders early, so that direct purchase
remains the exceptional rather than the standard method of acquiring reserve
material.
- Visit the bookstore with all relevant documentation in hand.
- Supply complete information to bookstore personnel in a courteous manner.
Timeliness
- The bookstore should be contacted with bibliographic information as soon
as possible, since they may have to locate and order material not in stock.
- Staff should plan on scheduling a trip to the bookstore promptly, to submit
or pick up orders.
Quality
- Sufficient and accurate bibliographic information should be provided to
the bookstore to enable them to supply the correct material. Provide ISBNs
when possible.
Effectiveness in use of resources
- Use this method of obtaining material when it is critical to have material
in hand as soon as possible. Otherwise, better discounts are obtained through
the Library's regular vendors with less overall use of staff time.
- Direct purchases are usually made for selected course reserve materials.
However, there may be exceptional circumstances under which it is appropriate
to make direct purchases for other kinds of materials. Consider alternatives
carefully before choosing this method of acquisition.
Methods of performance
- Follow procedures described in Section I.A.3 of the Branch Processing Manual
("On-Site Selection of Books from Local Stores"), http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Staff/BPM/1a3.html.
- Calling the bookstore first before paying a visit may save time and effort.
Quantity
- The number of titles acquired by direct purchase depends on relevant faculty's
requirements for course reserve material, including the timeliness with which
they submit order requests. In general, direct purchase should be done sparingly.
- Entry of orders into Innopac
Manner of performance
- Order entry in Innopac should balance speed and accuracy.
- Similar orders should be keyed in batches for maximum efficiency.
Timeliness
- Rush orders should be keyed into Innopac within one or two working days
upon completion of bibliographic checking.
- All other orders should be keyed as soon as possible upon completion of
bibliographic checking.
Quality
- Citations should be reproduced in Innopac without word omissions, alterations,
or typographical errors.
- Complete and correct fixed and variable length codes and fields should
be entered into each order record. Consult the Innopac Data Elements Notebook*
and the Conventions for Record Creation* in order to determine which codes
and fields are necessary for ordering different types of material.
- Vendors should be selected which are appropriate for the type of material
ordered and the country of publication. Consult the Guidelines for Vendor
Selection* in order to determine which vendors used by the Library are the
best source for obtaining the type of material being ordered.
Effectiveness in use of resources
- Must be able to use the Key new orders module of the Innopac Ordering and
Receiving Subsystem to create new monograph and serial order records. Must
be able to attach a new order record to an existing bibliographic record when
appropriate.
- Must be able to find OCLC records which exactly match citations in hand.
Must be able to use the downloading interface between OCLC and Innopac to
export order records to Innopac. Must be able to edit downloaded records in
Innopac using the Update module so that non-duplicate records with correct
status codes are retained as orders.
- When a question arises regarding the form or content of information included
in an order record, the keyer should know when to consult the Innopac Data
Elements Notebook, the Conventions for Record Creation, the Guidelines for
Vendor Selection, and when to consult with Collection Core Services Division
staff.
Methods of performance
- Orders should be reviewed, and questions and problems with ordering information
resolved, before the point of data entry.
- Orders are generally easier to key when batched according to type of order
(serial vs. monograph), fund, and vendor.
Quantity
- Approximately 50 orders per hour can be downloaded from OCLC to Innopac
if the titles are relatively easy to match to OCLC records. If citations are
extremely straightforward, this rate may be even higher. Batches in which
it is difficult to match titles to the correct OCLC record may take significantly
longer to complete.
- Approximately 35 orders per hour can be keyed into Innopac when orders
are created totally by manual data entry.
4. FOLLOWING UP ON ORDERS
Introduction
The purpose of follow-up on previously submitted orders is to ensure a response
to an order which has not been filled after a reasonable length of time. Follow-up
is usually prompted by patron request, or by routine inspection of on-order
files. Following up individually on every order for an area is neither possible
nor desirable. The speed and thoroughness of follow-up is usually individually
determined by the selector for a given area. Some aspects of follow-up on orders
might merge with other technical services workflows such as claiming.
Currently there is no established link in Library workflows between follow-up
and vendor evaluation, but if staff following up on orders notice a consistent
problem with a particular vendor, they are strongly advised to inform the Collection
Core Services Division, the Processing Unit, or the Director of the Technical
Services Department, as appropriate.
Manner of performance
- Follow-up should be responsive to patron and staff inquiries.
- Consult and interpret online order records before following up with other
units.
Timeliness
- Expect to see Innopac records for rush firm orders a week after submission
for ordering, unless returned as duplicates or out of print.
- Expect to see Innopac records for all other firm orders a month after submission
for ordering, unless returned as duplicates or out of print.
- Monographic orders are claimed according to the following schedule:
|
Rush claim |
1st claim |
2nd claim |
3rd claim |
| Domestic vendor |
70 days |
130 days |
230 days |
360 days |
| Foreign vendor |
100 days |
190 days |
360 days |
540 days |
Quality
- Order citations should be accurate enough to access correct Innopac and/or
Gladis records.
Effectiveness in use of resources
- Must be able to access the correct order record in Innopac and understand
the information presented in the following order record fields: order date,
received date, status, sent to, internal note, p.o. note, vendor note, payment
field. Consult the Innopac Data Elements Notebook* and the Conventions for
Record Creation* as needed to interpret these fields.
- Must be able to search Gladis to verify receipt of material, including
monographs, serials, MVMs, and serial material cataloged separately. Must
have the ability to access the order detail display on Gladis.
- Must be able to consult the appropriate fund activity report and determine
expenditures, encumbrances and cancellations for each item listed, in addition
to current overall fund balance.
Methods of performance
- Methods of follow-up will depend on how individual selectors and units
keep track of on-order titles. In general, follow-up procedures should include
checking Innopac, Gladis, the lost-in-transit list, and/or the stacks to see
whether or not material has been ordered, received, and cataloged.
Quantity
- In general, the quantity of follow-up done depends upon the time available;
it can be given a lower priority if staff time is short. Follow up on high-demand
materials first.
* Contact the Collection Core Services Division for access to these documents.
ACQUISITIONS CONTACT PEOPLE
- Africana Phyllis Bischof
- Art History Joanna Dyla, Oliver Heyer, Katherine Wayne
- Astronomy Grace Abiko, Diane Fortner
- Bancroft Bonnie Bearden, Steven Black, Baiba Strads
- Biosciences Nancy Axelrod, Mark Takaro, Randy Wilson
- Business Milt Ternberg
- Chemistry Jeanne Fong
- Classics Oliver Heyer, Jim Spohrer
- Documents/GSSI Andrea Sevetson, Beth Sibley, Kay Sundstrom
- Earth Sciences Michelle Robinson, Vivienne Roumani-Denn, Fatemah Van Buren
- East Asian Patrick Chew, Yong Kyu Choo, Jean Han, Yuki Ishimatsu, Noriko
Kato
- Education/Psychology Alison Brandt, Barbara Glendenning
- Engineering Don Lee, Michael Shepler
- English literature Michaelyn Burnette
- Environmental Design John Ceballos, Rebecca Vesterfelt
- French AnnMarie Mitchell
- Germanic Jim Spohrer
- GRDS Michaelyn Burnette, Phoebe Janes
- HAS/Refe Sondra Shair
- History Phoebe Janes
- HPST Hamid Mahamedi
- HSIS Bette Anton
- Info Sondra Shair
- Islamica Hamid Mahamedi
- Italian AnnMarie Mitchell
- Judaica Simon Bockie
- Latin America Carlos Delgado
- Information Management Bill Whitson
- Maps John Creaser, Phil Hoehn
- Math Grace Abiko, Diane Fortner
- Moffitt Barbara Kizziee, Sondra Shair
- MRC Kathleen Fitzhugh, Gary Handman
- Music Steve Mendoza
- News Norah Foster, Ann Swartzell
- Opto Bette Anton
- Collection Core Services Division Jim Gordon, Rebecca Green, Barbara Hill,
Shayee Khanaka, Marilyn Ng
- Philosophy Jan Carter
- Physics Diane Fortner, Laura Ng
- Polish AnnMarie Mitchell
- Portuguese AnnMarie Mitchell
- Political Science Beth Sibley
- Public Health Sue Miller, Kelly Ward
- Religious Studies Jan Carter
- Rhetoric Jan Carter
- Scandinavian Aija Kanbergs
- Social Welfare Lora Graham
- South Asia Suzanne McMahon, Vanessa Tait
- Southeast Asia Virginia Shih
Copyright © 1996-2003 The Regents of the University of California.
All Rights Reserved.
Last updated 11/20/06 Contact