SPEC Kit 337: Print Retention Decision Making · 43
Tangentially, the Education Advisory Board’s “Redefining the Academic Library” plus conducting an environmental scan
of strategies deployed in peer institutions.
Unknown, too long ago
We used models gathered from the ACRL storage facility discussion group.
What to Retain report
29. Were there any specific challenges in crafting your library’s communication strategy? N=42
Yes 9 21%
No 33 79%
If yes, please briefly describe the challenge(s). N=8
A concept paper developed by the dean and associate dean on the possible consolidation of print collections from 7
libraries to 3 libraries (using remote storage) generated internal and media attention. This created an environment that
was emotional.
Complexity of the decision making and strategic context.
Coordination of communication with our partner organization made planning outreach more challenging.
Explaining issues of space and budget always need to be addressed to university faculty and administrators.
Moving retained items to another location is easier to communicate than the corollary— withdrawal of local print
copies.
Past frustrations expressed by some faculty in program review reports.
Past perceptions of deaccession strategies ensured that the messaging was targeted, open, and frequent.
We wanted to make the campus community aware of our plans to move selected, little used materials off-site. We
guaranteed scanning and emailing or delivery of physical materials to campus within 48 hours of receiving a request.
We took great care not to compromise service. The biggest challenge was striking a careful balance in telling users what
was happening and what we could deliver without causing undue concern.
REMOTE SHELVING: RESPONSE TO RETENTION DECISIONS
30. Were there any points of internal or external resistance to transferring materials to the remote
shelving facility? N=43
Yes 30 70%
No 13 30%
If yes, please briefly describe the nature of the resistance. N=30
A few librarians and collegiate faculty were opposed because they thought material would be lost forever.
Tangentially, the Education Advisory Board’s “Redefining the Academic Library” plus conducting an environmental scan
of strategies deployed in peer institutions.
Unknown, too long ago
We used models gathered from the ACRL storage facility discussion group.
What to Retain report
29. Were there any specific challenges in crafting your library’s communication strategy? N=42
Yes 9 21%
No 33 79%
If yes, please briefly describe the challenge(s). N=8
A concept paper developed by the dean and associate dean on the possible consolidation of print collections from 7
libraries to 3 libraries (using remote storage) generated internal and media attention. This created an environment that
was emotional.
Complexity of the decision making and strategic context.
Coordination of communication with our partner organization made planning outreach more challenging.
Explaining issues of space and budget always need to be addressed to university faculty and administrators.
Moving retained items to another location is easier to communicate than the corollary— withdrawal of local print
copies.
Past frustrations expressed by some faculty in program review reports.
Past perceptions of deaccession strategies ensured that the messaging was targeted, open, and frequent.
We wanted to make the campus community aware of our plans to move selected, little used materials off-site. We
guaranteed scanning and emailing or delivery of physical materials to campus within 48 hours of receiving a request.
We took great care not to compromise service. The biggest challenge was striking a careful balance in telling users what
was happening and what we could deliver without causing undue concern.
REMOTE SHELVING: RESPONSE TO RETENTION DECISIONS
30. Were there any points of internal or external resistance to transferring materials to the remote
shelving facility? N=43
Yes 30 70%
No 13 30%
If yes, please briefly describe the nature of the resistance. N=30
A few librarians and collegiate faculty were opposed because they thought material would be lost forever.
