ISO and I reap –

Lessons from Antipodean implementations

of the ISO-ILL protocol

By Jillian Irwin and David Reid

Presented with support from Fretwell-Downing Informatics

National Library of New Zealand

• Next Generation National Library

• New Zealanders connected with information important to all aspects of their lives

• Te Puna Next Generation

• Document delivery working group

– Seamless location of information

– Improved “get” function

National Library’s interloan roles

• National Union Catalogue (Voyager)

• Te Puna Interloan (VDX)– A tool for library staff

– End-user testing

• Largest supplier in NZ

• Member of JSCI

Joint Standing Committee on Interloan• NLNZ & LIANZA membership

• Permanent supervisory body

• Formulates policy– Oversees NZ Interloan Scheme

– Membership

– Compliance

– Reviews policy, performance and needs

– Monitors changing trends

– Initiates changes

• Interloan Billing System

– third party agency

What makes for a good implementation?

• A vision

• A plan & communications

• Testing

• Task list

• Post-implementation activity

• Even more testing

Consequences for a national utility

• Location maintenance and settings

• Confidence– People

– Knowledge and skills

– Application robustness

– The underlying protocol

• Communication

University of Auckland Library

• Established 1883

• NZ’s largest university

• 40,000 students

• Over 21,000 requests in 2004

• One of NZ’s largest suppliers

• ILDS services to all staff & students

• “One size fits all” policy

Why an ISO-ILL compliant package?

• Improve services to customers

• Streamline workflows

• Reduce Library costs

• To unite all electronic interloan processes in one package

Processes & issues

• Web form for requests– No direct link to library’s catalogue

– Unable to check progress of requests

– Keeping patrons informed a low priority

• Requests re-input to various systems– Double handling inefficient

– Statistics gathering complex

• Te Puna Interloan utility of choice– Relied on NUC for holdings

– Inefficient, and unnecessary costs incurred

Expected benefits

• A patron interface will– Improve services, streamline workflows, reduce costs

– Patrons can check requests

– Improve turnaround times

• Library costs reduce– Double handling eliminated

– Lower processing costs

– Free staff for other roles

Auckland’s implementations

• Supplier side approach

• Te Puna Interloan– No difference to service

– Minor change to look of requests

– Staff-training needs minimal

– Workloads initially more complex• 1500 requests remained live• Systems run in tandem• Billing information

– Elimination of “own goals”

– Simultaneous searching

• Kinetica Document Delivery– Te Puna Interloan a pre-requisite

– KDD July 2005

– Complex and yet more straightforward

– 230 NZ locations, 580 Australian locations

– Duplicate symbols• Naming authorities, international standard

– Service levels• Profiles

– Charging• Charging regime

– No existing requests, testing, location load errors

Auckland’s implementations cont.

Auckland’s results

• Integration of two national utilities

• 800 potential suppliers

• Seamless access to Australasian resources

• Potential revenue stream

The future

• Even more suppliers

• Patron to supplier pathway

• Te Puna gateway to KDD– Need to resolve billing issues

• Other NZ implementations

Te PunaInterloan Auckland VDX

Transactiondatabase

Transactiondatabase

L1 L2 L3

LS1 LS2 LS3

ZNUC

Aucklandcatalogue

Z39.50Z39.50

LS1 LS2

Kinetica Document Delivery Z39.50

ANUC

Transactiondatabase

Commercialsuppliers

EU1 EU2

Conclusion

• Plan thoroughly

• Test methodically

• Nurture specialist support

• TEST AGAIN!