Download
sandy hurd director of strategic markets march 30 2007 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Sandy Hurd Director of Strategic Markets March 30, 2007 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Sandy Hurd Director of Strategic Markets March 30, 2007

Sandy Hurd Director of Strategic Markets March 30, 2007

306 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Sandy Hurd Director of Strategic Markets March 30, 2007

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Got Chopsticks? Get SUSHI! 16th North Carolina Serials Conference, 2007 Sandy Hurd Director of Strategic Markets March 30, 2007

  2. If I can’t eat it, what is it?

  3. Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative ProtocolZ39.93

  4. First some history…

  5. Nothing happens in a vacuum…

  6. Transactions: Order Order confirm Invoice Dispatch data Claims Claims Response Library / ILS Subscription Agent Publisher SISAC, ICEDIS, EDItEUR, SICI, DOI, NISO The Old EDI Presentation

  7. Transactions: Order Order confirm Invoice Dispatch data Claims Claims Response Plus: License data Serials Online Holdings Serials Release Notice Usage statistics Cost per use Acquisitions data Library / ILS / ERM / Coverage Database Publisher / Information Provider Subscription Agent / E-journal Provider DLF, XML, ONIX, COUNTER, SUSHI, NISO The World Spins Beyond EDI….

  8. Reproduced with Permission from Swets Information Services

  9. Reproduced with Permission from EBSCO Information Services

  10. www.icedis.org

  11. ICEDIS Discussions Journal supply chain efficiency improvement E-journal order format E-journal activation message ONIX SOH and SRN International Standard Party Identifier (ISPI) – entities involved in the creation and production of content More….

  12. SUSHI A formal, recognized NISO protocol designed for moving COUNTER reports from a content provider to a library A web-services model for requesting and delivering data • “Report Request” • “Report Response” A request for data where the response includes COUNTER data SUSHI doesn’t count, it moves what has been counted COUNTER compliant + SUSHI compliant

  13. Key Definitions, Courtesy of NISO COUNTER = Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources = An international initiative to facilitate the recording and exchange of online usage statistics SOAP = Simple Object Access Protocol = A protocol that specifies a self-contained messaging system used to exchange data and access services across a network (commonly the Internet) Web service = A server-based software system that provides information or functionality in response to XML-based messages sent through the Internet

  14. Note: • JR1 = Journal Report 1: Number of Successful Full-Text Article • Requests by Month and Journal • JR2 = Journal Report 2: Turnaways by Month and Journal • DB1 = Database Report 1: Total Searches and Sessions by Month • and Database • DB2 = Database Report 2: Turnaways by Month and Database • DB3 = Database Report 3: Total Searches and Sessions by Month • and Service • JR3 = Number of Successful Item Requests and Turnaways by Month, • Journal and Page Type • JR4 = Total Searches Run by Month and Service

  15. Why SUSHI? A formal, recognized NISO protocol designed for moving COUNTER reports from a content provider to a library Eliminates the time consuming and expensive process of manual statistics downloads Makes possible repositories of usage data Demonstrates feasibility of using XML Web Services for cross vendor machine interoperability

  16. Why SUSHI? Because we need good data to make good decisions

  17. Industry-wide support • More rapid development • Deployment underway

  18. Barriers to Easy E-resource Management For libraries • Complex contracts and purchasing models • Overlapping consortia • Internal bureaucracy • Select a tool • Statistics • Time-consuming to do manually • Need a single place to store and manipulate statistics • What do the numbers mean • Retrieval has been the bottleneck For information providers • Consortia requirements and desires • Compliance with standards as core to business • Statistics • COUNTER >>> SUSHI

  19. What do Librarians Want? Ease of retrieval, preferably automated Easy to understand Flexible date ranges in management reports Cost per use Central repository Simple interfaces

  20. Good for Information Providers Usage data critical in collection decisions for libraries and providers too Usage data demonstrates value Credible COUNTER results Make it easy and everyone is happy

  21. Early Adopters

  22. Innovative’s ERM AutoStat Configuration

  23. Export Usage Statistics in a Spreadsheet,Calculate Cost Per Use

  24. Implementation Challenges • Library / ILS / ERM / Coverage Database • Get a tool • Continue development and roll-out • Interoperability • Publisher / Information Provider • Begin and/or continue development and roll-out • Make service delivery a priority • Subscription Agent / E-journal Provider • Begin and/or continue development and roll-out • Make service delivery a priority

  25. What’s in the Works? SUSHI 1.0 (formalizes the NISO 0.1 draft) SERU (http://www.niso.org/committees/SERU/ ) Shared E-Resource Understanding DLF ERMI Phase 2 Steering Group work on interoperability between ILS acquisitions and ERM More work to come • NISO SUSHI • ONIX SOH and SRN • ICEDIS XML messages between publishers and agents

  26. Why does SUSHI Make a Difference? Automated retrieval Saves time Frees staff for more complex work Lets machines do what machines do well Supports collection analysis and management

  27. Remember… Standards are voluntary Development takes commitment, time, and testing Development takes less time today, but it’s still development Broad adoption still takes time There is value in what vendor partners bring to libraries

  28. With grateful acknowledgment… Adam ChandlerEBSCOTed Fons NISOOliver PeschSwets