1 / 26

Development and implementation of a comprehensive authority control performance measurement system

This presentation discusses the development and implementation of a robust performance measurement system for authority control at UNISA. It emphasizes the significance of performance measurement in library practices, detailing both quantity and quality measures. The presentation outlines the objectives, methodologies, post-implementation results, and benefits of the system, highlighting increased productivity and improved record quality. It also addresses the limitations encountered and the importance of maintaining a balance between quality and quantity in authority control, which is essential for effective library cataloging.

naomi
Télécharger la présentation

Development and implementation of a comprehensive authority control performance measurement system

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Development and implementation of a comprehensive authority control performance measurement system Louette Visser & Karen Esterhuyse 9thNorthumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services 2011

  2. Focus of this presentation • Importance of performance measurement • Authority control practice at UNISA • Development: quantity performance measures • Development: quality performance measures • Implementation: quantity performance measures • Implementation: quality performance measures • Post implementation results • Limitations of the system • Benefits of the system

  3. Why bother?: the importance of performance measurement of authority control • The catalogue is the cornerstone of the library’s collection • Authority control is the backbone of the catalogue

  4. Authority control practice at UNISA • Active participant in NACO • NACO prescribes strict standards and guidelines • Statistics of contributions are compiled twice yearly • UNISA has been one of the top contributors • Contributes new subject headings and subject heading change proposals through SACO • UNISA Library regards both quality and quantity as important

  5. Quality and quantity are both important and should be in balance

  6. Development of quantity performance measures • Basis for the development: award points to particular types of authority records • Rationale: complicated records require more research and effort - be awarded more points • Minimum monthly quantity target: 270 points • Target adjusted after three months: 390 points

  7. Development of quantity performance measures (Continued)

  8. Development of quantity performance measures (Continued)

  9. Implementation of quality performance measures • Quality standard: at least 85% without errors as required by Library of Congress • Identify quality indicators • Accuracy, completeness and compliance to standards of the following MARC fields: • 1XX (headings) • 4XX (references) • 5XX (cross-references) • 670 (transcription of data)

  10. Implementation of quality performance measures (Continued)

  11. Implementation of quality performance measures (Continued)

  12. Implementation of quality performance measures (Continued)

  13. Implementation of quality performance measures (Continued)

  14. Implementation of quantity performance measures • Target been reached: need to retrieve statistics for each cataloguer • Millennium Integrated Library System: Acode 2 to identify authority cataloguer responsible for record • Review files and saved query functionality enables gathering of statistics of each individual cataloguer and category of authority record • Statistics recorded on an Excel spreadsheet • Statistics reported monthly

  15. Implementation of quantity performance measures (Continued)

  16. Implementation of quality performance measures • Sample of fifty records, containing a variety of types of authority records, per individual authority cataloguer • Reviewed through a bi-annual peer group reviewing process • Every authority record in sample examined by all group members for non-compliance to the performance measures • Records that meet the standards are calculated and expressed as percentage of the total of the sample • Reported bi-annually

  17. Implementation of quality performance measures (continued)

  18. Implementation of quality performance measures (Continued)

  19. Post implementation results • Cataloguers expanded expertise by contributing wider variety of authority record types • Total output of authority records originally stable, but increased productivity after target adjustment • Improvement in quality of authority records

  20. Post implementation results (Continued)

  21. Post implementation results (Continued)

  22. Limitations of the system • System developed and implemented in 2010: long term effects yet to be determined • Short term results seems promising • Quality performance measurement only conducted bi-annually, more frequent reviews could take place

  23. Benefits of the system • Objective and effective performance reviews and evaluations of the authority cataloguers • Development of cataloguers • Increased quality • Increased productivity

  24. Questions? Thank you for your attention! Louette Visser Karen Esterhuyse visseal@unisa.ac.za esterkm@unisa.ac.za

More Related