Re: Claiming not worth it? (RE: [SERIALST] futile claiming) Pennington, Buddy D. 23 Jan 2009 22:09 UTC
We figured you would say something sooner or later. :-)
I want to second Rick's thought on this. When I started 5 years ago
here at UMKC, we were still working under the banner of "must have
complete bound volumes!" We had some issues that had a claim history of
seven, eight or nine claims stretching back two or even three years.
That was quickly scrapped in favor of a simple "three claims and out"
model. We claim up to three times (we use Swets). After the third
unsuccessful claim, we mark the issue unavailable and simply bind
incomplete. We've chosen to reduce time spent on claiming print issues
in favor of spending that time better maintaining access to our
Serial Acquisitions Librarian
University of Missouri - Kansas City
800 East 51st Street
Kansas City, MO 64110
UMKC University Libraries: Discovery. Knowledge. Empowerment.
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Anderson
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 3:23 PM
Subject: [SERIALST] Claiming not worth it? (RE: [SERIALST] futile
Those who are finding claiming to be frustrating may want to consider
doing away with routine claiming altogether. I realize that sounds
crazy, but if you do a rigorous cost/benefit analysis you may be
surprised at how little benefit you end up getting from your investment
in the claiming process for most titles.
Just a thought. (And one that some of you are probably surprised it
took me this long to share.)
Assoc. Dir. for Scholarly Resources & Collections
University of Utah