Re: query about the Big Deal

[David Prosser <david.prosser@rluk.ac.uk>]

Hi Claudia

I think you make a good point about faculty involvement.  Some 
institutions have gone for cancellation by stealth, but others 
have consulted widely on their campuses and worked with the 
faculty to both a) explain the problem and b) get feedback on 
what constitutes the core titles for each subject.  However, few 
libraries have issued press release trumpeting reduced access - 
which was my point on under-reporting.

I must say that I was very encouraged by Scott's narrative of how 
a well-managed retreat from the big deal can be a positive event 
on campus.  I have also just seen a fascinating presentation from 
Jonathan Nabe at Southern Illinois University Carbondale on their 
withdrawal from the big deal:

http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/morris_confs/14/

Two things struck me as particularly interesting.  Firstly, the 
deafening silence from faculty as access to little-used content 
was withdrawn.  Secondly, the low conversation rate from 
downloads to ILL requests.  It looks as if there is a lot of 
'casual' reading of content.

The strategy of title-by-title selection for core journals 
supplemented by ILL for rarely used material is exactly the 
strategy that UK members of RLUK will adopt if we are unable to 
reach satisfactory conclusions in our current negotiations with 
the largest publishers.  It is reassuring to see examples where a 
retreat from the big deal has been achieved with both financial 
savings and low user disquiet.

David


On 29 Jun 2011, at 04:10, claudia holland wrote:

> Thank you for sharing this information, David.
>
> I would like to know what experience others have had with
> including faculty, who would be affected by journal
> cancellations, in the decision-making process. Granted this may
> open a can of worms better left sealed, but wouldn't this open
> approach inform faculty of the fact that their library is
> experiencing cutbacks or a flat budget and cannot continue to
> provide access to content they may, in fact, rely on for research
> purposes (let's ignore the infrequently used aspect). Should
> faculty be part of this process? Would/does this approach
> minimize the potential backlash to journal cancellations on the
> library or would it simply bog down the inevitable?
>
> Claudia Holland