Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 14:08:10 -0800
From: "Yu, Simone" <Yu_Simone@GSB.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Library Holdings vs Full-text Databases (David Goodman)

Perhaps depending on the discipline you are in and the usage of the
journals, you may feel confident or more comfortable in canceling print
subscriptions.  We are a business library and we have cancelled most trade
journals that are full-text in Dow Jones Interactive, and in most cases,
they are also full-text in ABI/Inform (Proquest Direct), in Academic
Universe (Lexis/Nexis), and many other packages.  Proquest includes tables,
charts, and graphs for trade journals, and DJI includes tables.  Also, most
business libraries subscribe to TableBase which duplicates most tables in
journals, investment research reports, government publications, etc.  For
business information, trade journal is one of many types of publication to
obtain industry/trade information.  Researchers in business typically rely
heavily on numerical historical data sets and/or management journals or
journals in other disciplines in the social sciences, i.e. they seldom quote
trade journals.

For popular titles such as Fortune, Forbes, Business Week, etc. that are
omnipresent and in multiple formats (print, electronic, microfiche/film) for
every library, corporation, institution, and all over the world, we have
stopped binding them.

So, relying on the fact that we will always have DJI, ABI, some form of
Lexis/Nexis, TableBase, and document delivery, we are aggressively canceling
trade journal subscriptions.

Most important of all, most business people need trade publications for
current information and not for historical narratives.

Other options are outsourcing, document delivery service, interlibrary loan,
and consortia agreements.

Let's also hope that another institution, following JSTOR, Project Muse,
IDEAL, HighWire Press, will take on the responsibility of archiving more
scholarly management journals.

Hope this helps.

Simone Yu
Asst Bibliographer/Research Librarian
J Hugh Jackson Library
Graduate School of Business
Stanford University
simoneyu@gsb.stanford.edu

-----Original Message-----
>
> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 11:28:27 -0500
> From: Judy McConnell <jmcconne@PCT.EDU>
> Subject: Library Holdings vs Full-text Databases
>
> Greetings,
>
> First of all let me thank all of you who responded to my query on
> "Compact Shelving"  - appreciated your time and feedback.
>
> Now I would like to know if any one has created a Policy for
> maintaining current titles (both paper and/or microfilm) that are also
> in a full-text database?
>
> We subscribe to Proquest Direct and have dropped a few of our current
> subscriptions for titles in full-text and have continued to purchase
> microfilm.
>
> As our library is now experiencing space and budget constraints, we
> want to develop a policy for maintaining or discontinuing the purchase
> of duplicate (and sometimes triplicate) subscriptions for titles in
> full-text.  I think that we are not quite comfortable yet in
> relinquishing our control and yet it maybe time to "just do it".
>
> I would be interested in what others have done, and what problems or
> advantages or disadvantages they have experienced.
>
> Thanks in Advance,
> Judy McConnell
>
> Judy F. McConnell
> Assistant Professor
> Serials Librarian
> Penn College Library DIF #69
> One College Avenue
> Williamsport, PA 17701-5799
> Phone: 570-320-2400  X7458
> Fax: 570-327-4503
> E-mail: jmcconne@pct.edu