College and Research Libraries L A W R E N C E E . L E O N A R D Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center: A Feasibility Study At present, there appear to be no centers serving exclusively the technical processing needs of a group of academic libraries. A Na- tional Science Foundation funded study was begun in Colorado in February 1967 to explore the feasibility of establishing such a proc- essing center. This article describes the background of the study and the methodology employed in carrying out the outlined research goals of the project. A _ B O U T O N C E in so long articles appear in different countries rehearsing the fol- lies of the present system of doing the same thing over a thousand times, as we librarians do in cataloging books that reach so many libraries. But right here they all stop. There somehow seems to be an idea among certain leaders of our craft "that such a thing [cooperative cataloging] is wholly visionary, at least their failure to take any practical steps in the matter would seem to indicate such a belief." So spoke Melvil Dewey at the Conference of Librarians, Octo- ber 1876, in Philadelphia.1 These senti- ments have been expressed many times since, though evidently not often enough. The concept of cooperative central- ized cataloging of library materials is obviously not a recent one. One hun- dred and seventeen years ago Charles Coffin Jewett proposed that the Smith- sonian Institution begin accumulating stereotype blocks of its cataloging and 1 Melvil Dewey, Statement Made at the Conference of Librarians, Philadelphia, 1 8 7 6 , reported in Library Journal, I (November 1 8 7 6 ) , 118. Mr. Leonard is a doctoral candidate at the Graduate School of Library Science, University of Illinois, Urbana. that of other contributing libraries to be used in compiling printed catalogs of different libraries, joint catalogs of two or more libraries, and possibly a union catalog of all libraries in the country.2 Although no action was taken by the Smithsonian, the proposal influenced the thinking of Dewey and his contempo- raries and through their urging led to the card catalog service begun in 1901 by the Library of Congress.3 The advent of the processing center is a much more recent phenomenon. A processing center has been defined as: A single agency which processes materials for a wider group of Libraries. This may be, among other types, a library system with its branch of departmental libraries, a central agency such as a state or county library agency, some arrangement among a group of independent library systems whereby they agree to set up and operate 2 Charles C. Jewett, "A Plan for Stereotyping Cata- logues by Separate Titles; and for Forming a General Stereotyped Catalogue of Public Libraries in the United States," in Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1 8 5 0 , IV (Washington: S. F . Baird, 1 8 5 1 ) , 1 6 5 - 7 6 ; Jewett, Smithsonian Re- Tport on the Construction of Catalogues of Libraries . . . (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1 8 5 2 ) , 78p. 3 Melvil Dewey, Printed Catalog Cards from a Central Bureau. Library, 2d Series, II (January 1 9 0 1 ) , 1 3 0 - 3 4 . / 393 394 / College 6- Research Libraries • September 1968 such a center cooperatively, or where in- dependent libraries contract to purchase this service from some other established library;4 Also as "an agency ordering, receiving, cataloging, and preparing materials for two or more libraries."5 Centralized processing has been described as: Those steps whereby library materials for several independent libraries, either by contract or informal agreement, are or- dered, cataloged, and physically prepared for use by library patrons, these operations being performed in one location with bill- ing, packing, and distribution to these same libraries.6 Although there are isolated examples of centralized processing in the early 1900's, processing centers as such came into existence in the 1940's, grew in number in the 1950's, and have prolifer- ated during the 1960's. These centers serve public and school libraries almost without exception. The Veterans Ad- ministration Cataloging Section (an ex- ception),7 the California State Library Processing Center,8 Southwest Missouri Library Service, Inc.,9 Northern Colora- do Processing Center,10 and Library 4 Evelyn Day Mullen, "Guidelines for Establishing a Centralized Library Processing Center," Library Re- sources and Technical Services, II (Summer 1 9 5 8 ) , 1 7 1 . 5 American Library Association Resources and Tech- nical Services Division, Regional Processing Committee, "Guidelines for Centralized Technical Services," Li- brary Resources and Technical Services, X (Spring 1 9 6 6 ) , 2 3 3 . 6 James R. Hunt, "The Historical Development of Processing Centers in the United States," Library Re- sources and Technical Services, VIII (Winter 1 9 6 4 ) , 54. 7 Richard H. Logsdon, "The V.A. Speeds Cataloging Procedures," Library Journal, L X X I I I (February 1, 1 9 4 8 ) , 1 6 6 - 6 8 . 8 Margaret W. Thompson, "California State Library Processing Center under Library Services Act," Li- brary Resources and Technical Services, II (Summer 1 9 5 8 ) , 1 8 4 - 8 5 . * Brigitte L. Kenney, "Centralized Processing Missouri Style," Library Resources and Technical Services, II (Summer 1 9 5 8 ) , 1 8 5 - 9 0 . 10 Elizabeth Adcock, "Centralized Technical Processes in a County Library," Library Resources and Technical Services, II (Summer 1 9 5 8 ) , 1 9 1 - 9 5 . Service Center of Eastern Ohio,11 are but a few of the many centers now operat- ing successfully. Though there are many centers proc- essing materials for public and school li- braries, an exhaustive literature search did not reveal centers now performing technical processing for a group of aca- demic libraries. As book prices and processing costs continue to rise, aca- demic libraries are showing more inter- est in exploring the feasibility of such centers to serve their needs. There is in- dication that this interest will increase, particularly if the ongoing studies dem- onstrate that centralized processing is a viable approach to the problems now faced by many academic librarians. Several studies are now in progress. The Council on Library Resources has awarded grants to the New England Board of Higher Education to design a mechanized Regional Library Catalog- ing and Processing Center for six New England university libraries.12 The study is being conducted by Inforonics, Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts. The Califor- nia state colleges have been considering the possibility of a processing center or centers for their system, as have libraries in Nevada and Hawaii. Academic li- braries in Ohio are including centralized processing in a developing plan.13 The Colorado Academic Libraries Book Proc- essing Center study funded by a Nation- al Science Foundation grant appears to 11 Mary Lathrop Eckford, "The Library Service Cen- ter of Eastern Ohio; An Experiment in Centralized Processing," Library Resources and Technical Services, V (Winter 1 9 6 1 ) , 5 - 3 3 . " Council on Library Resources. "Grant to New England Board of Higher Education to Help Six-State, Inter-University Library Cataloging Project," Recent Developments, no. 216, released June 1, 1 9 6 7 ; "Re- gional Library Technical Processing Center," Scien- tific Information Notes, IX (August-September 1 9 6 7 ) , 9. M "College Library Center to be Created in Ohio," Library Journal, XCII (February 15, 1 9 6 7 ) , 7 2 6 ; also Lewis C. Branacomb, "The Ohio College Library Center," The Rub-Off, XVIII (March-April 1 9 6 7 ) . Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center / 395 be the only other active research now being conducted in the area of central- ized processing for academic libraries. B A C K G R O U N D Colorado's academic libraries have long been interested in the possible es- tablishment of a center which would ac- quire and process book materials for the participating libraries. A special commit- tee, elected by the Colorado College and Head Librarians Conference in April of 1941, outlined approaches to a study of centralized cataloging and oth- er technical processes, including central- ized book buying.14 Several reports and many favorable recommendations re- sulted from the committee's efforts. Un- fortunately, the timing for a project was not right, even though the ideas and the talent were present. A study financed by the Council on Library Resources at the request of the Colorado Council of Librarians, Associa- tion of State Institutions of Higher Edu- cation in Colorado, was conducted by Donald Oehlerts in 1962 to investigate the possibility of establishing a technical processing center to serve state sup- ported academic libraries. Direct trans- mission of interlibrary loans by special courier was also considered in this study.15 The courier service was subse- quently established and presently makes a round-trip delivery from Fort Collins to Denver twice weekly, stopping at nine libraries along the way. It provides rapid interlibrary loan service among the participating libraries. A plan is now under study to extend the courier serv- ice to that of a daily run between Fort 14 Colorado College and Head Librarians Conference. "Special Committee on Centralized Technical Processes and Book Buying," First Report, August 1 9 4 2 ; Sec- ond Report, February 1 9 4 3 . 15 Donald E . Oehlerts, A Study to Determine the Feasibility of Establishing a Cooperative Technical Processing Program and Direct Transmission of Inter- library Loans (Denver, Colorado: Association of State Institutions of Higher Education in Colorado, 1 9 6 2 ) . Collins and Pueblo, with a considerably increased number of participants. In late 1965 the National Science Foundation was approached to deter- mine their interest in funding the Proc- essing Center project. Based on NSF's favorable reaction, a formal proposal was prepared for submission to the Foundation. The project was outlined to be conducted in three phases: Phase I concerned with data collection and eval- uation; Phase II with systems design; and Phase III, an operational center on a one- or two-year trial basis. In October 1966 the National Science Foundation awarded the University of Colorado and the Colorado Council of Librarians16 a grant of $54,000 to con- duct a one-year study (Phase I ) con- cerning practicability of establishing a book processing center in Colorado.17 The member libraries of the Council contributed a total of $10,500 to the study. A subsequent grant of $27,500 was awarded in June 1967 to conduct Phase II of the study. The center will initially serve the nine state supported college and university libraries, and if successful will expand its operation to include interested pri- vate academic institutions. The objective of such a center will be to order and de- liver to a central point books requested by the member libraries; to catalog, clas- sify, process, and prepare the books; to maintain appropriate records; and to forward completely processed books and catalog cards to the requesting library. Disposition of the bibliographic data generated through technical processing of titles will be examined in the opera- 18 Principal investigators for the study are Balph E . Ellsworth and Richard M. Dougherty of the University of Colorado libraries and Don S. Culbertson, American Library Association, Information Science and Auto- mation Division (formerly with Colorado State Uni- versity libraries). 17 Richard M. Dougherty, " A Central Processing Center for Colorado Academic Libraries," The Colora- do Academic Library, III (Summer and Fall 1 9 6 6 ) , 4-6. 396 / College 6- Research Libraries • September 1968 tional study (Phase I I I ) . A record of ti- tles processed will be forwarded to the Bibliographical Center for Research, Denver, and to the Library of Congress, for inclusion in the regional and national union catalogs. Machine readable record possibilities will be investigated during Phase III (e.g., production of a book catalog of member library holdings, is- suance of periodic acquisitions lists, bib- liographies). One aspect will likely in- clude testing of LC's MARC output as a data base. A D E S C R I P T I O N O F T H E S T U D Y Libraries of the nine state supported Colorado academic institutions are par- ticipating in the feasibility study. They are Adams State College, Alamosa; Col- orado State College, Greeley; Colorado School of Mines, Golden; Colorado State University, Fort Collins; Fort Lewis Col- lege, Durango; Metropolitan State Col- lege, Denver; Southern Colorado State College, Pueblo; University of Colorado, Boulder; and Western State College, Gunnison. An exhaustive search of the literature was performed prior to the study reveal- ing a plethora of articles concerning public library and school library process- ing centers. There were very few ref- erences pertaining to academic library processing center studies, and no infor- mation regarding operational academic library centers, bearing out the impres- sion that virtually nothing of a practical nature has been attempted in this area. Phase I Comparative operational data. Fol- lowing several preliminary meetings of the investigators and staff of the nine member libraries, Phase I of the study was begun February 1, 1967. The tasks to be performed during the first phase concentrated on data collection and evaluation. A principal consideration during the initial stage is to ascertain whether a centralized operation can perform more effectively and econom- ically than each library processing its own material. The possibility of central- ization per se is not being questioned but rather the effectiveness of central- ized processing given x number of li- braries in an identified geographic loca- tion. Unit cost. Calculation of a valid unit cost figure for acquiring and processing a book has been accomplished by on-site study at each participating library. Flow charts have been prepared for the tech- nical processing areas of each library, time observation studies have been con- ducted, existing records examined, and diary studies performed by selected li- brary staff members for two periods of one week each. These studies have pro- duced sufficient data to permit reliable cost figures to be calculated. Title duplication. The study has es- tablished the level of acquisition dupli- cation among the participating libraries to determine whether there is sufficient duplication to warrant bulk processing. A sample drawn from the January-De- cember 1966 American Book Publishing Record has been employed to measure interinstitutional duplication within an identifiable group of publishers and sub- ject areas. Significant duplication of ti- tles has been identified. BPR sample. A systematic sample was prepared by clipping every thirtieth entry from BPR. Entries were taken from all sections of BPR, including juve- nile and fiction titles. (Note: BPR ex- cludes federal and state government publications; subscription books; disser- tations; second, third, fourth, etc., print- ings or impressions; serials, quarterlies, and other periodicals; pamphlets under forty-nine pages). Only paperback fic- tion titles under $1 were excluded from the sample drawn. As the juvenile and fiction titles are not LC classified, and as this same sample will be used to de- termine modification of LC classification by each member library, further titles were systematically drawn from BPR- Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center / 397 1966 to bring the sample size to 1,206 ti- tles. With a universe of 30,050 titles,18 a sample size of 1,206 titles selected ran- domly has proved to match the subject distribution of the universe, using the chi-square distribution test. The sample has been checked against holdings of the outstanding orders file, public catalog, shelflist, and serials records of each li- brary to determine per cent of American imprints announced in 1966 that have been ordered/received by each library; per cent duplication of American im- print titles among the member libraries; per cent modification of LC copy by each library; and per cent of titles for which more than one copy is ordered. Materials processed. The study will identify the type(s) of material which the center can process most effectively to provide a substantive contribution to the technical processing effort of the li- braries involved; i.e., will the center process only current United States im- prints, will it handle foreign titles (what languages), serials, or standing orders? Volume of processing. The current volume of ordering and processing by category of material at each library has been calculated. The study must pro- vide a reasonable estimate of the antici- pated volume of processing which the center could expect from the libraries and structure its processing system to handle at least that level of work. Processing cycle time. Four processing dates are of interest in the study. The first, date of receipt of a request in the library, will be considered as an element in the attitude survey to be conducted in Phase I. The other three dates will be used to calculate the mean (average) processing time for each library. These dates are: date the library places an or- der with a vendor; date the requested title is received by the library; date the ™ 1966 Annual Statistics, Publishers Weekly (Janu- ary 30, 1 9 6 7 ) , p. 3 4 . processed book is forwarded to circula- tion. It has been assumed that an opera- tional center must process books at least as rapidly as the participating libraries now process materials to render effective service to each library. If it does not, why should libraries bother to send ma- terials through a central agency, unless a reduced processing cost might offset in- convenience of delay in receiving books? Outstanding orders file sample. A sta- tistically valid sample has been drawn from the outstanding orders file at each library. Order slips were pulled in a sys- tematic sample, reproduced on the li- brary's available copying machine, and the order slips were then refiled. The re- produced slips were cut apart for tabu- lation. Tabulated results from the sam- ple show the percentage of American and foreign imprints on order; the spe- cific foreign languages which the library orders; the source of order—whether placed through a vendor or directly to the publisher; percentage of rush re- quests placed by each library; percent- age of gift items received. Existing policies and procedures. The present book selection policies, ordering procedures, payment methods, and processing operations of each of the li- braries and business offices have been examined in detail and documented. The success of the center depends upon existing methods employed by the li- braries, their compatibility of operation, and level of standardization which can reasonably be effected. Attitude Survey. A study of user group needs (i.e., information and bib- liographic requirements of faculty, stu- dents, and participating libraries) was conducted in November and December 1967. Their reaction to existing library services and to possible services which the library could offer in conjunction with the center was sought (e.g., a un- ion list of recent acquisitions of the par- ticipating libraries; individual and union 398 / College 6- Research Libraries • September 1968 book catalogs; demand or routinely sup- plied bibliographies; a periodical con- tents service; a union list of serial hold- ings; telefacsimile transmission; an ex- panded courier service). A draft questionnaire was reviewed by the director of each participating li- brary. Suggested revisions were incorpo- rated in the draft which a management consulting firm has examined for content and validity of methodology. A pilot test questionnaire was distributed to a small faculty group, responses noted, and nec- essary changes were made before the questionnaire was distributed generally. The respondents were selected on a ran- dom basis. A follow-up interview (struc- tured interview) with participating fac- ulty from each institution was con- ducted in November and December to obtain verbal reactions and validate the questionnaire. Completion of Phase I (with excep- tion of the attitude survey) will provide the necessary data to construct the de- sign requirements for the processing center. Phase 11 This phase of the feasibility study was funded the latter part of June 1967 by NSF. Phase II was begun in September, overlapping with the completion of sev- eral elements of Phase I, i.e., tabulation and analysis of data and the attitude survey. The project was funded through April 30, 1968. Phase II will identify and develop the systems design require- ments for the proposed center. Data is being analyzed and reduced to workable systems design specifications. The study staff is now developing decision flow charts, work flow diagrams, flow process charts, forms design, organizational pat- terns, and space requirements for the center. A subcontract has been let with Westat Research, Inc., a management consulting firm, to construct a mathe- matical model of the developed system, and to test the system on an electronic computer using Phase I data and find- ings as variable input to the system.19 A realistic unit processing charge will be calculated which would permit the cen- ter to operate on a self-supporting basis. Other resulting products of the Phase II study will be an optimum system design; personnel staffing requirements; expect- ed processing time-lag; equipment and facility requirements needed for the cen- ter's operation. Completion of Phase II will provide all of the criteria to answer the question of feasibility (economic and operational practicability) of a processing center to serve Colorado's academic libraries. If the simulated center can process books at twice the speed and half the cost of individual libraries, Phase III funding will be requested. If, however, the sim- ulated center processes books at one- quarter the speed and four times the cost, then the project will be dropped. Some of the spin-off activities of the study will also be explored for more pro- ductive cooperative projects. Phase III The Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center will become an operational unit on an experimental ba- sis if Phase II shows positive results.20 10 Ralph E. Ellsworth and Richard M. Dougherty, A Proposal to National Science Foundation for Sup- port of Development of an Academic Libraries Co- operative Processing Center for All Colorado Colleges and Universities. State I: Design of the system. Pro- posal 6 5 . 5 . 2 4 2 as revised March, July 1966. 20 A proposal has been drafted to fund a statewide bibliographic network in Colorado. Project BEACON (Bibliographic Exchange And Communications Net- work) will link participants by the national teletype system, expand an existing courier service, broaden an existing area union list of serials, and establish an intercampus delivery service among other proposed tasks. The study will measure the effectiveness of the network in improving access to and dissemination of bibliographic materials and bibliographic data. User attitudes to services before and after establishment of the network will be documented. The Book Process- ing Center was included in the funding request with submission of the BEACON proposal in November. This article was written in September 1967. The feasi- bility study was completed May 31, 1968, and the final report was submitted to the National Science Foundation in June 1968. The Project BEACON pro- posal was not funded; however, a revised proposal requesting centralized processing funding was sub- mitted and is now being considered. The final report will be published by Scarecrow Press and should be available in late 1968. Colorado Academic Libraries Book Processing Center / 399 During a trial period of one or two years, the effectiveness of the center will be measured to determine whether the outlined requirements and anticipated results are being met. Modifications will be implemented as necessary. The work- ing relationship and exchange of data among the processing center, the Bibli- ographical Center for Research, and other elements in the developing region- al bibliographical network will be estab- lished during this trial operational peri- od. An enlightening "before" and "after" picture of a processing center operation will be obtained with completion of the Phase III trial period. Whatever the outcome of Phases I and II may be, a valuable mountain of data has already been collected which will be of benefit to the participating li- braries, to all academic librarians inter- ested in calculating unit processing costs for their library procedures, and to those libraries now considering centralized technical processing. Although all the data are not yet tabulated and all the returns are not yet in, the centralized processing concept definitely appears to be feasible for Colorado's academic li- braries. • •