Consortium Building for Libraries

1
Consortium Building for Libraries

• An eIFL sponsored workshop
• Ann Okerson
• July 2004
• ann.okerson_at_yale.edu

2
Sponsor eIFL.net

• eIFL Bringing electronic Information to
  Libraries
• eIFL.net is an independent foundation that
  strives to lead, negotiate, support and advocate
  for the wide availability of electronic resources
  by library users in transition and developing
  countries. Its main focus is on negotiating
  affordable subscriptions on a multi-country
  consortial basis, while supporting the
  enhancement of emerging national library
  consortia in member countries.

3
Outline of topics

• What is a consortium?
• Why do they exist?
• What types of consortia are there?
• Examples of how they work, how are they organized
  (governed) and funded
• Characteristics of consortia examples
• How to move forward structure, mission, vision,
  planning, funding
• Resources available

4
Definition of a library consortium

• "A library consortium is any local, regional,
  or national cooperative association of libraries
  that provides for the systematic and effective
  coordination of the resources of schools, public,
  academic, and special libraries and information
  centers, for improving services to the clientele
  of such libraries.
• (US Federal Communications Commission)

5
Definition of a library consortium

• A cooperative association of Libraries of
  different types. Its purpose is to share human
  and information resources so that the collective
  strengths of the institutions facilitate the
  research and learning of the members
  constituents. A consortium supports resource
  sharing and provides services to users through
  programs in cooperative acquisition, access to
  electronic resources, access to physical
  collections, enhanced interlibrary loan and
  document delivery.
• (H. B. Panchakshari, TIFR, Mumbai)

6
Definition of a library consortium

• Main Message
• A basic premise of consortia is that by
  working through consortial arrangements, members
  can achieve more than could be achieved
  individually.
• (From a library course syllabus at the
  University of Alberta, Canada)

7
Characteristics of consortia, 1

• Always institutions/libraries, not individuals
• Can be formal or informal, big or small
• Many, many numbers and types see
  ltwww.library.yale.edu/consortiagt listing about
  170 consortia worldwide (not a complete listing)
  and growing
• Other words used for consortium alliance,
  association, confederation, cooperative, council,
  digital library, network
• I.e., many choices for name structure,
  depending on mission, organization, message

8
Characteristics of consortia, 2

• Some are becoming very large, complex (such as
  JISC in the UK the 16 OCLC networks in the
  US).
• Some have broad programs others do principally
  licensing of electronic resources
• Can be restricted
• to specific library types (special libraries,
  academic libraries, etc.) or government agencies
• Can be open
• To all local, or regional, or country wide group
  libraries some consortia include all libraries
  in their region including elementary school and
  public

9
Characteristics of consortia, 3

• Underlying structure can be informal or
  formal, some or lots of centralization, many
  activities or highly focused
• Most Informal no central office, leadership
  rotates, volunteers are key this can work for a
  startup, or for a narrowly focused set of
  consortial goals and/or limited financial
  resources
• Most Formal legally incorporated or an
  organized office in a government or NGO,
  permanent staff, an ambitious set of ambitions
  and goals, many members?
• Can change over time

10
Characteristics of consortia, 4
11
Consortia some dates to remember

• Consortia in the U.S. have been around since the
  1930s (North Carolina)
• 1960s and 70s Shared cataloging through OCLC
  and RLG was born
• An item now (in theory anyhow) has to be
  catalogued only one time this transformed
  cataloging in libraries worldwide
• 1970s Combined online catalogs were developed
  (multiple catalogs that can be searched at one
  time) now available on the Web (see OCLC
  WorldCat through Google and RLGs RedLightGreen).

12
Consortia some dates to remember

• 1980s Focus moved to fast delivery for books
  and articles, as requested by libraries
  end-users
• 1990s Large-scale licensing of electronic
  resources began, launched by publishers such as
  Encyclopedia Britannica and Academic Press
• 1993 Netscape and the IE start to transform the
  way information is presented and delivered
• NOTE The availability of electronic online
  information resources expanded immensely the role
  and presence of library consortia

13
Factors motivating consortial licensing

• With print media, libraries buy items or objects,
  which are owned (though content is not owned)
• BUT today most electronic information is
  transmitted through the Web -- not sold in a
  tangible medium (except for CD or DVD) rather,
  it is delivered via remote access -- there is no
  object to own
• So, publishers prefer to license rights of use
• Publishers and vendors are willing/eager to lease
  large, costly e- resources to library consortia
  under a single negotiated agreement

14
Factors motivating consortial licensing, 2

• The computer revolution has increased
  expectations users want rapid access, on
  computer screens, location and time independent
  -- e-resources deliver those things
• There are now numerous brand new electronic
  materials as well as electronic versions of
  traditional print materials
• Potentially There are hundreds of databases to
  license!

15
Factors motivating consortial licensing, 3

• Governments have provided additional funding to
  support access to citizens and researchers, to
  improve information access
• For institutions, states, and entire countries
• Negotiating with multiple institutions at once
  can save publishers and information providers
  time and money
• A consortial contract brings many users eyes to
  a resource

16
EXAMPLES OF CONSORTIA MISSION, ORGANIZATION,
SIZE, STRUCTURE

• MALICO Malawi Library and Information
  Consortium
• CALICO - South Africa Cape Library Cooperative
• CALIS China Academic Library and Information
  System
• ELNET Estonian Library Network Consortium
• LALC Lebanese Academic Library Consortium
• NERL NorthEast Rearch Libraries Consortium

17
Example of a new library consortium LALC

• Lebanese Academic Library consortium LALC
• 5 Academic libraries, university supported
• In January 2002, private institutions formed
  (LALC), the first library consortium in Lebanon.
  Its mission is to improve and expand the library
  services and resources of its institutional
  members. This is achieved through building a
  cooperative yet comprehensive collection of
  electronic resources and e-journals that will
  enable LALC member institutions to share
  resources and provide information to their users
  more efficiently and cost-effectively.
• Primary function electronic content licensing

18
More examples of library consortia - ELNET

• Estonian Library Network consortium
  www.elnet.ee
• 13 multi-type libraries
• a non-profit association of libraries, archives,
  and other organizations that collect and make
  available information.
• The main areas of its activity are
• Administering and developing the ESTER shared
  catalog of Estonian libraries
• Coordinating the acquisition of electronic
  publications for ELNET member libraries, and
• Coordinating other joint projects

19
Example of a new consortium - MALICO

• MALICO Malawi Library and Information
  Consortium ltwww.bunda.sdnp.org.mw/malico.htmgt
• Based at Bunda College
• Legal trust under Malawi law
• Academic 3, Public 1, Special 2, Other 1
• Primary functions
• Collections sharing
• Interlibrary loan/document delivery
• Electronic content licensing
• Training

20
Example of a new consortium - MALICO

• Member of the eIFL multi Country Consortium and
  beneficiary of INASP PERI Project, MALICO has
  several objectives
• to encourage national, regional and international
  cooperation among information stakeholders,
• to influence information policy at the national
  level,
• to work for adequate ICT infrastructure for
  members, especially sufficient internet bandwidth
  
• to assist in the development of appropriate ICT
  skills at all levels, to facilitate access to
  electronic journal articles in international
  databases,
• to organise and digitise Malawian content,
• to provide information consultancy

21
More examples of library consortia - CALICO

• Cape Library Cooperative ltwww.adamastor/ac.za/Ac
  ademic/Calicogt
• Incorporated a registered trust
• Five academic libraries
• Primary functions
• Collections sharing
• Interlibrary loan/document delivery
• Electronic content licensing
• Union lists/shared online catalogs
• Other Shared library and information system

22
More examples of library consortia - CALIS

• China Academic Library and Information System
  ltwww.calis.edu.cn/gt
• Based at Peking University
• Nationwide academic library consortium, funded
  primarily by Chinese government, under the
  leadership of Ministry of Education
• The mission of CALIS is to promote, maintain and
  improve library resource-sharing among Chinese
  universities, between academic libraries and
  other libraries and information institutions.

23
More examples of library consortia - CALIS

• Membership Academic 60 Public 4 Information
  service organizations 10
• Primary Functions
• Cataloging services
• Collections sharing
• Interlibrary loan/document delivery
• Electronic content licensing
• Electronic content loading/presentation
• Training
• Union lists/shared online catalogs
• Storage facilities

24
NERL our consortium

• Organized/coordinated at Yale, 1996
• Started with 12 large research libraries
• Now 26 large academic research libraries in the
  northeastern U.S (mix of public/private
  institutions, across 12 states)
• 39 smaller affiliated academic institutions
• A voluntary consortium with shared goals
• Governed by letter of agreement between the
  library directors of these institutions
• Governing decisions are made by 26 Representatives

25
NERL Members

• Boston University - Charter
• Brown U - Charter
• Columbia U - Charter
• Cornell U - Charter
• Dartmouth College - Charter
• Delaware U 11/02
• George Washington U 11/02
• Georgetown U 11/02
• Harvard U - Charter
• Johns Hopkins U 11/02
• MIT - Charter
• New York U - Charter

• Notre Dame U 9/98
• Pittsburgh U - 10/00
• Princeton U - Charter
• Rochester U - Charter
• Rutgers U - Charter
• Stanford U - 10/00
• Syracuse U - Charter
• Temple U - Charter
• U. of Connecticut - Charter
• U. of Massachusetts - Charter
• U. of Pennsylvania - Charter
• U. of Rochester - Charter
• Yale U - Charter

26
NERL characteristics

• Beginnings started with nothing but good will
  and shared goals, without staff support, no
  office, volunteer time (mine)
• We now pay small dues, which pay for a full-time
  Program Librarian and ½ clerical support
• We have a sunset clause, i.e., review every 3
  years to see if we will continue
• We communicate extensively
• web site (public and private)
• e-list (frequent daily messages)
• standing committees
• all meet twice a year

27
Sample agreement - objectives

• I am pleased to confirm the terms of our
  agreement with the institutions on the attached
  List A jointly to license electronic materials
  for the primary purpose of obtaining more
  favorable licensing terms (including price, use,
  and other language) than each individual library
  could obtain on its own.
• A secondary objective of the Consortium may be
  to work on matters of access and archiving of
  these materials, where the information provider
  is not able to provide these to the satisfaction
  of members of the Consortium.

28
Sample agreement how?

• The term of this initial agreement is Two Years,
  concluding on July 1, 1998. At that point it will
  be examined and revised if needed. It may be
  terminated before that time by mutual agreement
  or it may be extended beyond the term likewise.
• Our name for this purpose shall be the Northeast
  Research Libraries Consortium (NERL).
• Each library Member participating in this
  Consortium will designate a Representative to the
  Consortium. This individual shall attend meetings
  of the Consortium and participate in negotiations
  as appropriate.

29
Sample agreement - finance

• Modest dues may be charged to members to sustain
  the NERL operations.
• Licensing fees charged by electronic information
  providers to the Members, shall be paid by the
  individual libraries where that is the mode of
  doing business.
• Where the fee is to be paid as one collective
  sum, the individual Member sums shall be paid
  into a special Consortial account for the
  duration of this agreement, and that sum shall be
  paid to each publisher upon receipt of the Member
  fees.
• Yale University may provide quarterly financial
  reports to the Members.    

30
Being NERL

• How NERL does agenda-setting
• strategic choices by Representatives, plus
• opportunistic response to external offers
• Our advantage we are quick, flexible, we enjoy a
  shared learning experience
• Our disadvantage institutions completely
  independent of each other, with no shared
  governance, or funding, participation in every
  deal, project, committee, etc., is voluntary

31
Being NERL, 2

• Therefore
• We are entirely dependent on collaboration and
  continuing goodwill of the members
• We need to respect our differences
• We need to accommodate both those who are early
  adopters of any program, as well as those who
  may join later -- flexibility
• Everyone needs to be a good citizen of NERL in
  the way we do our business

32
Being NERL, 3

• What we do
• Electronic licensing (lots of it)
• Wide-ranging discussions, communications,
  information sharing
• Task forces on selected topics (such as e-books,
  catalog records, analyzing database usage
  statistics (bibliomining)
• Apply for study grants for research projects
• Expedited document delivery for a subset of
  members (Borrow Direct)

33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
NERL public web sitehttp//www.library.yale.edu/N
ERLpublic
38
Consortial challenges, 1

• Provide great electronic services and resources
  to our member libraries users
• Build internal consensus among members
• Demonstrate integrity and good will with
  information providers
• Find better and better ways to assess our
  successes and improve our services
• Publicize our successes
• Be highly cost effective, low overhead costs

39
Consortial challenges, 2

• It costs money to save money (structure, staff,
  legal advice, library systems, time of the
  members, etc.)
• Consortia need to be large enough to be
  effective critical mass of libraries
• But if they become too large, governance and
  management can become very complex (this is a
  balancing act)
• New consortia take longer to make decisions than
  longer-existing ones (need to develop the rules
  for their work)

40
Consortial challenges, 3

• In the early days of making a consortial
  agreements, the libraries may not achieve as many
  efficiencies as desired (this passes with time)
• Members must need to learn to work together,
  communicate, and trust each other
• Consortia have to tell their story, i.e.,
  publicize their successes to funding agencies
• Consortia want to grow ambition, size, and
  focus become a tangible concern

41
Consortial challenges, 4

• Belonging to a consortium is likely to add extra
  work to each library (in terms of committee
  service or communications, for example)
• Libraries may lose some of their decision-making
  power to the larger group
• Decision making can be slowed down as everyone
  reaches common understandings and agreements
• Not all members are able to cooperate or share
  costs equally

42
Basic questions regarding consortial management

• Who will organize and manage?
• A member of the consortium?
• A committee?
• A new, formal legal organization or entity?
• An external agent (not for profit or commercial)
• Under what type of understanding?
• Letter of Agreement?
• Legal and official incorporation
• Several possibilities which ones might suitable
  here?

43
Basic questions regarding consortial management, 2

• What is the consortiums purpose why is it being
  formed?
• Who is part of the consortium, which libraries,
  schools, agencies, etc.?
• Governance
• Who will take the lead?
• How will members participate in discussions and
  decisions?
• How will it be funded (staffing and programs)
• How to handle the unexpected good or bad

44
New Yorker, 11/30/98