SPEC Kit 345: Shared Print Programs · 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
This SPEC Kit explores shared print programs, the
ecology of print retention in distributed networks,
expressed benefits of participation, relationships be-
tween existing consortia and shared print program
coordination, and long-term anticipated uses for print.
It identifies the qualities that ARL member libraries
value about these partnerships, and their rationales
for participation and for continued, collaborative ac-
tion around print retention. It identifies investments in
shared print programs and estimates print retention
progress made with those resources.
One goal of this study was to understand better
the types of institutions that are emerging as reposi-
tory sites in shared print programs. It sought to un-
derstand the extent to which ARL member libraries
serve as shared-print-holding institutions relative to
other members in the programs and within the ARL
membership, as a peer group. The study also sought to
understand how shared print partnerships extend be-
yond the boundaries of existing consortial or resource
sharing networks. The answers to these questions
might suggest changes in the fundamental nature
of print stewardship and raise questions about the
organization, governance, and infrastructure needed
to support cooperative collection management now
and in the future.
Other significant goals of this study included de-
veloping a deeper understanding of ARL libraries’
real and perceived roles and responsibilities in print
collection management, the types of partners ARL
libraries engage with in shared print arrangements,
and the longer-term cases for retaining and provid-
ing access to print. Answers to all of these questions
might inform how long to pursue collaborative print
collection management and with whom to collaborate.
Further study might be needed to correlate findings
with other work in scholarly communities around
this same topic and with ethnographic studies of print
and digital use.
Finally, another goal of the study was to under-
stand the key characteristics and configurations of
shared print programs from an operational perspec-
tive. A subsequent publication will address configura-
tions of shared print programs, business, operations,
and service models in more detail.
Surveys and Response Rates
Two surveys were issued in May 2014: one to ARL
member libraries and another to managers/coordi-
nators of shared print programs. ARL libraries were
asked general questions about all shared print pro-
grams in which the institution participates, goals and
benefits of participation, rationale for participation,
and services provided. This survey did not ask about
the details of a single, specific shared print program
but rather about a library’s participation in shared
print arrangements in general.
The Shared Print Program Managers/Coordinators
survey asked questions about a specific shared print
program. Managers of 36 shared print programs
were invited to participate in the study. The survey
asked about specific business and operational models,
strategies, goals, membership, collections, archiving
progress, access, and other services. The purpose of
this survey was to explore the extent of ARL libraries’
participation in shared print projects, the type and
scope of projects in which ARL libraries choose to
participate, and the concerns and advantages specific
to different models.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
This SPEC Kit explores shared print programs, the
ecology of print retention in distributed networks,
expressed benefits of participation, relationships be-
tween existing consortia and shared print program
coordination, and long-term anticipated uses for print.
It identifies the qualities that ARL member libraries
value about these partnerships, and their rationales
for participation and for continued, collaborative ac-
tion around print retention. It identifies investments in
shared print programs and estimates print retention
progress made with those resources.
One goal of this study was to understand better
the types of institutions that are emerging as reposi-
tory sites in shared print programs. It sought to un-
derstand the extent to which ARL member libraries
serve as shared-print-holding institutions relative to
other members in the programs and within the ARL
membership, as a peer group. The study also sought to
understand how shared print partnerships extend be-
yond the boundaries of existing consortial or resource
sharing networks. The answers to these questions
might suggest changes in the fundamental nature
of print stewardship and raise questions about the
organization, governance, and infrastructure needed
to support cooperative collection management now
and in the future.
Other significant goals of this study included de-
veloping a deeper understanding of ARL libraries’
real and perceived roles and responsibilities in print
collection management, the types of partners ARL
libraries engage with in shared print arrangements,
and the longer-term cases for retaining and provid-
ing access to print. Answers to all of these questions
might inform how long to pursue collaborative print
collection management and with whom to collaborate.
Further study might be needed to correlate findings
with other work in scholarly communities around
this same topic and with ethnographic studies of print
and digital use.
Finally, another goal of the study was to under-
stand the key characteristics and configurations of
shared print programs from an operational perspec-
tive. A subsequent publication will address configura-
tions of shared print programs, business, operations,
and service models in more detail.
Surveys and Response Rates
Two surveys were issued in May 2014: one to ARL
member libraries and another to managers/coordi-
nators of shared print programs. ARL libraries were
asked general questions about all shared print pro-
grams in which the institution participates, goals and
benefits of participation, rationale for participation,
and services provided. This survey did not ask about
the details of a single, specific shared print program
but rather about a library’s participation in shared
print arrangements in general.
The Shared Print Program Managers/Coordinators
survey asked questions about a specific shared print
program. Managers of 36 shared print programs
were invited to participate in the study. The survey
asked about specific business and operational models,
strategies, goals, membership, collections, archiving
progress, access, and other services. The purpose of
this survey was to explore the extent of ARL libraries’
participation in shared print projects, the type and
scope of projects in which ARL libraries choose to
participate, and the concerns and advantages specific
to different models.
