Document Delivery Assessment at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville

Kathlyn Behm and Julia Hansen

With prices for serials increasing annually, libraries are looking at alternate methods of providing articles to patrons. The increase in the numbers of serials and cuts in library holdings are overloading interlibrary loan services. One alternate method, using document delivery suppliers, provides access to journals not in the library's holdings with an improved delivery time. An initial study was conducted by SIUE's Library and Information Services to assess faculty use of document delivery services and identify problems that might occur when faculty ordered articles using a library account number.

Three university departments were chosen to take part in the study: Chemistry, Economics and English. We believed these would reflect any varying needs of the sciences and humanities. Approximately five faculty members from each department were asked to participate. The subject librarians in those areas consulted with liaisons from each department in this selection.

Three document delivery services were chosen to supply articles — UMI Infostore, EBSCODOC and ISI The Genuine Article, and accounts were set up with those providers. They were included in our study because they were supported by FirstSearch databases. We subscribed to Econlit and MLA in FirstSearch, two indexes that would be useful for the Economics and the English faculty. Although no database for chemistry was available in FirstSearch, MEDLINE was appropriate for some faculty, and Article 1 also was available. We initially had intended for faculty to use FirstSearch databases and order documents through FirstSearch, but then decided against any restrictions so we could identify problems with other types of requests.

Faculty were given the option of ordering documents from any of the three suppliers by three methods: FirstSearch, telephone or fax.

Meetings were held with faculty members who were given instruction in using FirstSearch and all the information needed for ordering documents from the supplier. Faculty were given no limits on the number of documents they could order, the method by which documents were ordered or the method of delivery. They could be delivered by fax, rush mail or regular mail and were delivered directly to the faculty member, not to the library. We did ask faculty not to order articles from journals already in the library's collection, but we did not review their orders.

We developed a form for faculty to complete and return for each article they ordered. (Appendix 1) This was to help us keep track of the number of articles being ordered and to identify faculty members taking advantage of the service. Another purpose was to help us quickly resolve any problems that might be occurring. Unfortunately, only a few forms were completed and returned for articles ordered.

We gave faculty ordering instructions in spring 1995, assuming they would want to order documents for research during the summer. We were surprised when they did not immediately begin requesting documents; the first orders were not placed until September. Although we expected the funds to be spent quickly, we did not end the program until the summer of 1996.

At the completion of the program we sent participating faculty members a questionnaire. One also was sent to the chairperson of the Department of Economics for distribution to any other faculty who took part. (Appendix 2) This was to inform us about use of the services, satisfaction with the suppliers and any problems that occurred.

We did not receive responses from everyone who got a questionnaire and are assuming that most of the individuals who did not respond did not place orders from the suppliers. We did receive a response from two faculty members who said they did not take part in the program. One individual said he did not have time to learn how to find and order items. The second faculty member said in one case the article was not available for document delivery, and in the remaining cases he/she obtained the materials through "usual

31

sources," probably through interlibrary loan. Even though instruction was provided in using FirstSearch and ordering articles, we suspect that some faculty simply did not take time to become familiar with ordering through FirstSearch. Although they could have placed orders by telephone or fax, they believed it easier to rely on more customary services such as interlibrary loan.

The minimum number of articles ordered was one document. The maximum number ordered was 10 or more. Rather than ordering articles themselves, some faculty sent requests to the Science/Nursing Librarian asking that articles be ordered for them.

Faculty ordered from all three suppliers. Some depended on only one supplier, while others using FirstSearch were able to select the service providing the article at the lowest cost. Faculty members placed requests through FirstSearch or by telephone. None placed orders by fax.

We asked faculty if they were satisfied with the speed of delivery, the quality of the reproduction of the article(s) and accuracy in filling the order. All individuals were satisfied with the speed of delivery for all three suppliers. At the beginning of the project there appeared to be a delay for orders placed through FirstSearch. Some orders for 24-hour fax were not received the following day. After a meeting held with an OCLC representative, this was rectified.

Overall faculty were satisfied with the quality of the articles received. There were individual comments about one supplier. One individual stated he/she was satisfied with the quality of reproduction, but qualified this statement with a complaint about the quality of faxed documents ordered from one of the suppliers. Another faculty member had no complaints about the quality from the same supplier. One order placed by the Science/Nursing Librarian for a faculty member resulted in problems with the quality of a faxed article, the problem was with a department fax machine.

Overall, there were no complaints about accuracy in filling orders. One faculty member complained about the accuracy of one supplier and stated that he/she had to resort to follow-up telephone calls several times to straighten out problems.

We asked faculty if they had problems with delivery of articles ordered through FirstSearch, by telephone or fax. Two individuals who ordered articles through FirstSearch had problems. One faculty member was billed for several orders, while another received articles by fax when they were ordered for regular mail delivery. We were unable to determine the source of the problem, faculty members, orders, suppliers, etc. None of the faculty complained of problems when articles were ordered by telephone. No orders were made by fax.

Faculty were asked if they checked library holdings before they ordered articles to be sure the journals were not held at SIUE. Most individuals always checked, one usually checked and one admitted that he/she never checked.

We asked faculty to comment on their experiences. Respondents found the service valuable and agreed that in most cases it met their needs. Availability of articles generally was not a problem through document delivery and in few cases were articles unavailable. The service supported a faculty members research needs in facilitating the completion of a proposal for a major grant. Individuals appeared to take advantage of document delivery services for more routine orders and place more difficult requests through interlibrary loan.

There were some minor problems with administering the program. It was established as a separate entity from our Interlibrary Loan department, and at times there was confusion in keeping document delivery accounts straight. Close cooperation is needed with Interlibrary Loan and with individuals involved in administering library accounts.

Conclusion

It would be valuable to repeat this study with a larger number of participants. At the beginning of the project faculty did not have as much remote access to electronic databases from office computers as they do at this time, nor did all faculty have Internet access. Now there is more availability to computers and to the Internet at the university, and more faculty are becoming adept at searching electronic indexes through the Internet. It would be valuable to repeat this study to identify the strengths and problems of allowing faculty direct access to document delivery providers as well as traditional interlibrary loan services.

We were surprised that there was a delay in ordering at the beginning and that funds lasted as long as they did. Two individuals verbally indicated that they postponed getting started and were able to order only one article before the program ended. They regretted that they waited and stated that they would have requested more if the program had lasted longer. Faculty appeared to be slow in starting, but increased orders as time went on.

32

Please return to Kathlyn Behm, Box 1063, as soon as the article is received.

33