Left Menu Right Menu

COMMENTS ON YBP USE (2008)

 

Central Oregon Community College

I have to report that COCC Barber Library has not yet used any YBP services re the recent agreement with the Orbis Cascade Alliance. We will be looking at YBP over the remainder of Winter term. 95% of our items are received and processed via OSU's Valley Library so that may add an additional layer of complexity for us.

Chemeketa CC:

We had planned to ask YBP out to do a demo this winter. With all of the concern over GOBI2 performance, I think we will wait on the demo until after GOBI3 is fully live. We are interested in exploring their options for electronic order transmission and GOBI Plus services for our firm orders. It is unlikely that we would set up an approval plan, but would certainly look into establishing electronic notification profiles for our selection areas. Chemeketa does not currently have a preferred vendor for our firm or standing orders. It is our intent to review YBP and other options this coming year, stay informed about new developments, and fold Alliance plans for cooperative collecting into our final decision. The earliest that we could implement a new work flow/selection system would be next academic year.

Clark College:

At Clark we have also not been impressed with the staff follow-through. It took a very long time to get some of the basics set up. Consequently we aren't ordering from them yet.

Eastern Oregon University

Eastern is unlikely, due to our severe budget situation, to participate in any meaningful way in the YBP project. Our budget is so small that we will probably continue to split it among our existing vendors for both new and used materials. The collection analysis capability of Gobitween would only really be useful, if everyone were purchasing everything thrpough YBP, which is probably not going to happen. We will continue to use the Summit catalogue to verify title purchases among the Orbis libraries

Eastern WA Univ:

At EWU, we're at the beginning of the process to plan a move of one approval program to YBP. We have had a rep visit (follow-up from ALA Annual), and will soon set a date for another visit to introduce the Library faculty to YBP. If we go ahead, we will likely make a switch on July 1.

Evergreen:

Evergreen has used YBP as our main vendor for several years now (at least 8-10) and we do have an approval plan through them. The approval plan has served us very well, especially as our tech-services and acquisitions staff numbers have diminished during the last decade.

Our YBP approval plan represents about 50-60% of our monograph budget in Soc-Sci and Humanties/Arts. Our literature profile has been particularly satisfying. Most of our science funds go toward periodicals, so our monograph profile there is quite small. YBP rarely features in our Reference acquisitions processes.

In the last few years we've experienced some problems with some of our YBP approval plan profiles due mainly to staff changes at YBP that have  resulted in some aspects of our plan being dropped. Hopefully our new rep (we're on our second new rep in as many years) will get these problems sorted out soon.  We always enjoy meeting with the YBP rep for a day or two once a year to examine and tweak our profiles.

Gobi is something that a few of our reference librarians use (esp. online slips) for collection development, and sometimes YBP is the best vendor for titles librarians, faculty and students request. I have never known Gobi services to be particularly speedy or efficient. Online slips are useful, and our reference faculty do browse through them. Most use Summit to check on titles other libraries have in the pipeline.

Like others on the cdmc DL have already noted, Evergreen often looks to the used hardcover market for titles that are not recent publications.  We find the least expensive copy we can--and order that.

George Fox:

We don’t have any YBP-related activity to report.  We don’t use approval plans, and we try to get faculty involved in selection as much as possible.  Checking GO-Between would be an extra step for us since we would need to check Summit anyway (which we often do already).  We will be watching with interest, however.

Lane Community College

We here at the LCC Library had some technical difficulties getting started with YBP. Our acquisitions assistant experienced considerable delays in getting set up. As of now, only 2 of our 5 selectors have begun experimenting with it. We haven't yet completed an order with YBP. The selectors who have tried using Gobi2 liked being able to search for titles using call numbers, but strongly disliked the slowness of the Gobi2 interface. YBP customer service has been quite slow in responding to questions or concerns. We've never had approval plans in the past, and we're not likely to in the future. We might be interested in having a campus visit and/or training opportunities, but we haven't been informed of any, and it's very difficult to get any YBP service via phone or email.

Lewis & Clark:

I met with Joan last week about various features in GOBI-Plus that might work well to facilitate use of YBP among our librarian selectors.

During that time, I noticed the interface was very slow, as did she. I believe she made some comment about YBP working on it. Granted, LC has been having a few bandwidth issues lately (soon to be resolved, I hear), so perhaps that compounded the problem. But unless their search interface gets considerably faster, the collective costs of library staff time involved far outweighs any differences in discount between YBP and BNA. Until those speed issues are fixed, I sense a malaise among our selectors as far as YBP is concerned, if not an outright frustration and annoyance that will only act to hinder conversion of those Collection Manager stalwarts.

Regardless, Joan and I tentatively planned for her to conduct a workshop in early February for our subject selectors. We'll see what the GOBI speed is like at that time and go from there.

Linfield:

Linfield gave YBP a trial last spring, 2/7-8/7; we divided in half the orders we usually send to Midwest during that time.  While we had had great, supportive conversations with the vendor rep, who visited us 1/7, the staff at YBP did not follow through.  Three weeks of orders were simply lost.  Our claims were not acted upon until numerous phone calls and emails.  It took them 5 months to set up our binding profile.  So, while we may be willing to give them another trial, it won’t be for at least another year.
 

Marylhurst:

Last school year we made the switch in our firm orders from BNA to YBP mostly due to the increased speed of delivery YBP provides.  I continue to use them for our firm orders on newly published material.  Most materials come within one week of initial order, about 95% within two weeks.  I had no trouble with the initial setup and my contact for ongoing service issues has been speedy in returning emails; I’ve found their service to be very good.  I use their GOBI database to do initial searching and data gathering.  The data they provide on their titles such as status (in stock, available to order, out of stock at publisher, etc.) is very useful information and I find it to be well maintained. 

I have taken note of the Go-Between data on consortia purchases but find a search in Summit provides more accurate information on who owns/has on order a particular item.  We download a bib record from OCLC and use Edifact for electronic transfer of our orders to YBP.  We do not do approval plans nor does other staff/faculty have time to use the GOBI database for selection searching and use of their folders feature.  GOBI does have a slow search interface.  This is one area I would love to see them strive for improvement.

Mt. Hood Community College

MHCC used YBP as one of its major vendors before the agreement. We have had excellent experience with customer service and with delivery time (a huge improvement over a former vendor). We do not use the approval service and do not plan to set up a profile at this time. We use a different vendor for our standing orders.

Librarians use the select cart to enter their orders which are then placed by technical services. Due to local circumstances, we "pick up"

our orders from YBP's server and download them into our system--not the most efficient but what works here for now. (This also bypasses the fee YBP charges.) One of our librarian's attended III's load table training session so is able to write load tables.

Since the agreement, Joan has visited us and is returning next week to provide separate training sessions on the "new" GOBI for our librarians and for our technical services staff.

Oregon Health & Science University

At OHSU, we have talked a few times with Joan Thompson to make sure our GOBI interface complies with the consortia agreement. Joan made a few adjustments and things appear fine. 

We currently use YBP for one of our approval plans. Due to a deposit we have with Majors, we are strongly considering shifting our Majors approval plan to YBP in the next fiscal year. In early January, I hope to train our acquisitions staff in using GOBI. I would also like to schedule a visit with Joan in January/February to iron out some problems with our current approval plan and also demo GOBI for our selectors. 

Oregon Inst of Technology:

The OIT Library is very interested in working with YBP; however, this year’s limited book budget has precluded us from moving beyond an initial meeting with Joan and a brief investigation of how we would implement a shift from Blackwell to YBP.  Our selectors have access to the demo account, but without funds everything seems hypothetical.  We’re hoping for an improvement in our funding situation later this year.

Oregon St Univ:

OSU has not yet undertaken any YBP activities.

Portland CC:

Portland Community College has started looking at YBP.  We had a great meeting with Joan Thompson, who talked to us about the consortial agreement, and who also showed us how GOBI works.  She set us up with an account, and we've been testing GOBI and YBP for some of our orders.

My plan was to roll it out to our selectors so that they can use the consortial ordering information, but I'm not willing to do that until GOBI improves its speed considerably.  If I replace the current tools our selectors use, it has to be with something that's going to make their lives better, not slow them down.

Overall, I like it and I see a lot of potential... but not until the speed improves.

Portland St Univ:

Probably the report from PSU should be "nothing yet, but soon".   The acquisitions librarian is midway on developing an electronic invoicing and payment project w/ Midwest and did not want to abandon that in order to move to YBP figuring that the internal processes developed will be transferrable to another vendor later.  We had initially thought that we would move our approval plan to YBP, but are now contemplating moving our approval plan to Blackwell and our firms to YBP.  Not sure yet. Probably considering vendor relations and all we would prefer this not go very far.

Reed

Reed is assessing what it is going to do re: YBP, but I know for sure we will not move all our orders to them.

St. Martin’s Univ

A trainer from YBP visited Saint Martin's in December and our acquisitions staff member and all 3 librarians received GOBI accounts and training on using the system. We currently divide most of our ordering between Blackwell (we are contractually obligated to purchase a set amount with Blackwell through the PSAIL consortium), Amazon and YBP.

This year we will establish an approval plan for business materials with YBP.  I honestly don't know how much use we'll make of GOBI when we make our decisions to purchase titles. Because we're such a small library, most of our purchasing decisions are driven by faculty requests and are intended to support student work in specific classes. For those reasons, it's usually important for us to have the materials on site, rather than relying on copies other Alliance libraries have purchased.

I suspect the librarians in the areas of History and Literature will make the most use of the Alliance order information available in GOBI. Let me know if you have any further questions.

Seattle Pacific

Here at SPU we are currently not YBP customers, and we have our money committed to another vendor for yet a period of time.  Not all our money is committed though, so on my to-do list is to set-up an account with YBP and to start placing some firm orders.  I was hoping to get this done by Christmas, but alas, I don’t think I’ll make it.  It is definitely a priority for January though.

Seattle Univ:

Lemieux Library has been consumed this past year with program review and design for a rennovated and new library facility so we have not fullly explored this new Alliance initiative with YPB. Our only contact and activity in this regard was a visit last summer by YPB staff members to demonstrate GOBI capabilities.

Currently Lemieux Library has a long established relationship with Blackwell for both firm orders and approvals. We also participate in a mini-consortium for firm order acqusitions with PSAIL Consortium Partners and are committed to fulfilling that agreement through calendar year 2008.  It is not likely that Lemieux Library will make a sudden move to YPB either for firm orders or approvals.

We appreciate the opportunity to support this revolutionary change in collection development and acquisitions but we are likely to proceed in an evolutionary way.  During 2008 we intend to keep informed and investigate options for YBP as time and resources allow.

Univ of Oregon:

The UO Libraries have met with YBP representatives several times for GOBI training. Staff are also investigating YBP-based workflows and planning to model something after WSU or UW. Within the next year, subject specialists will receive GOBI3 training and move towards placing firm orders with YBP (right now the majority of domestic firm orders go to Bookhouse). The UO already has several YBP approval plans. 

Univ of Portland:

Our collection development team just had a meeting with Joan and Jenny on Wednesday to look at Gobi. Our collection development team will now begin the discussion of how we might make best use of Gobi here at UP. I wanted to answer after that meeting. 

We have been using three of the four vendors the Alliance evaluated as part of the vendor program. Each has done a good job for us and has complementary service characteristics. Speed of service was YBP's hallmark.

We decided that we would participate in the vendor program and shift our business primarily to YBP because we think the program has great potential, we would like to support efforts to enhance the work of the Alliance, and we need to make best use of our print budget as it shrinks compared to our budget for e-resources. We will be switching our firm orders to YBP before we look at switching standing orders and will still use other vendors or go direct for special formats and needs.

Right now I have more questions than answers about using Gobi and we won't begin any transition to Gobi until the new version is released. Currently we import an OCLC record into our system at time of order and send orders using Edifact ordering on our local system. Questions include: how would we use Gobi in our workflow ands what improvements can be made, how best and when to get full MARC records into our local system, how will our selectors use Gobi, and generally, what's the optimum number of copies within the consortia? We have four small approval plans with YBP. We will be making adjustments to those plans and some selectors are interested in developing others, if only to identify titles to supplement requests that come from faculty. (Faculty selects approximately 50% of our firm orders.) Now that we've had our demo, we will begin to tackle our questions and make the shift to YBP, so I appreciate knowing what others are doing.

Univ of Puget Sound:

Before leaving on holidays, I would like to share where UPS is with the YBP purchasing arrangement.  Like Seattle University, we have a long established relationship with Blackwell for both firm orders and approvals. We also participate in a mini-consortium for firm order acquisitions with PSAIL Consortium Partners and are committed to fulfilling that agreement through calendar year 2008.

 While we use Blackwell as our major vendor, we have used YBP as a secondary vendor and so have something of a relationship built with them.  Although we have not had any training with Joan, I have done some experimenting with Gobi and discovered how to look at consortium purchases.  However, faculty is our main selectors, rather than librarians, which complicates our cooperation with a shared purchasing plan. 

We are currently exploring ways we might convince faculty of the benefits of consortial buying, and continue to watch others' ideas with great interest.  Our use of approval plans has been lackluster in the past, and it will be several years, if at all, that approval plans might be more than new title announcements for us.

Univ of WA:

The Univ. of Washington has recently revised its humanities and social sciences approval profiles and we anticipate increased approvals from YBP, especially in the social sciences. In addition, we expect increased use of YBP as a selection tool for e-book titles from eBrary and EBL in the coming months.

Walla Walla University:

We have no plans to use YBP at this time. We use Midwest Library Services for the vast majority of our Firm Orders and the largest part of our Standing Orders. We have a longstanding and very satisfactory relationship with them. We do not use Approval Plans as we use faculty selectors and also are curriculum driven in our collection development. Using the GOBI system would only create extra steps for us and we would still need to consult the Summit catalog anyway for the most complete information about other Summit library's holdings and what is held by other Summit libraries only influences our purchases for certain titles and subject areas. With our current staffing levels and budget constraints, we will not be using the YBP and the GOBI system at this time.

We will watch the experiences of the other members with interest and examine options in the future.

Washington State Univ:

The WSU Collections Committee held a meeting for selectors that focused on the use of YBP for cooperative purchasing.  I presented the introduction using Lynn Chmelir’s slide presentation from the last Alliance-cdmc meeting and Lou Vyhnanek gave a demonstration of features that he uses on GOBI.  There were many good questions including a discussion of the meaning of “duplication”.

We were finally able to get Marc e-invoicing working between YBP and Innovative (this is different than EDIFACT and does not cost anything to implement).  It took years but a sample load table from UW helped as well as the missing step in the procedures of telling Innovative to move the load table to the correct position. 

We have written procedures for downloading ISBN from Millennium and removing the text from the ISBN field.  The test file sent to YBP was successfully loaded.  This will help both WSU selectors as well as those using GOBI to see not only what we purchased or are reviewing for purchase on YBP, but what we have purchased from other vendors.  This is still a pilot project but we hope to get at least the last 3 or 4 years of purchases uploaded and then do monthly updates.

http://wiki.wsu.edu/wsuwiki/Monograph_Acquisitions#YBP_Procedures_for_downloading_ISBN  (Procedures till under construction)

We have increased the number of approval plans since Jenny Hudson visited this summer.  We are frustrated that we can not put a dollar cap on those but it has helped even out workflow.

Western Oregon Univ:

 

WOU has had two meetings with Joan, including one GOBI training session, and is working with Jim Shetler to configure Edifact ordering and correctly map our load table for getting records from YBP. We are hoping to switch most of our firm orders over to YBP starting in January. One minor irritation was the surprise cost of implementing the "export workflow", which according to Jim S. will cost between $1000 and $1500 annually.

WOU has always manually keyed our brief bibs and this is our first venture into receiving any form of record (other than invoicing) from a vendor, so this may be standard practice, but I was caught off guard. Other than that surprise, the experience has been extremely pleasant and easy so far.

Western WA Univ:

Like some others, we have a long standing, very satisfactory relationship with Blackwell.  We do not at this time have an approval plan, and I do not foresee having one in the near future.  Approximately 85% of our acquisitions budget is spent on subscription items of one sort or another. 

Of the firm orders placed in the last complete fiscal year, a good many are older titles we order from used book sources (dismaying, perhaps, but true), and we also order a number of children’s books, which I understand YBP does not handle at this time (at least that’s what I understood from the October meeting).  The vast majority of our firm orders are driven by specific faculty requests or curriculum needs and a need to have the titles available locally.  Our selectors do consult Summit if they feel a requested title is actually outside our collecting scope and is fairly expensive; if there are copies available in Summit they may decide against purchasing a local copy. In other words, in most subject areas we are no longer doing traditional “collection development” and have not had the resources to do so for some time.

I note one respondent to your message has stated that they find Summit a more accurate source of information as to which of our partners may own a copy or have one on order than they find in GOBI.  Ordering via GOBI would represent an extra step for us, whether done by acquisitions staff or by selectors.  We download an OCLC record at the time of ordering, and FTP our file to Blackwell (for those titles we are ordering from them). We are finding that 60-65% of those OCLC records do not need cataloging review, and these titles go from receiving direct to labeling and then on to the public shelves.  Asking our selectors to work in GOBI would be an increase in workload for them; our acquisitions staff do all the vendor selection and ordering steps, and I would not support asking selectors to take that on in addition to what their current workloads, which are very heavy.

I am more than a little dismayed by the thought of paying for working in or extracting information from a vendor database or paying for “export workflow” (assuming we are actively using that vendor) – whether YPB’s or anyone else’s.  We pay Innovative more than enough in annual fees.

Having said all that, we will continue to watch the consortium’s progress with YBP.  Times and circumstances change, and we all need to be aware of all our options.  

Whitman

Whitman College has been using YBP for approval, firm, and standing orders since September 07. We have been pleased with the service that they have provided thus far.

Willamette

not much to report because WU switched pretty much all of our business over to YBP over a year ago. We're still figuring things out as we go along but we've set up an approval plan (slips only) for all subjects although we're not really using it too much yet. We're just starting to experiment with GobiAlerts.--Joni

 

updated 1/23/08