Interlibrary loan purchase-on-demand: A misleading literature

Abstract

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Literature of Acquisitions in Review, 2010–11

“…52 According to van Dyk's analysis, an ILL PDA transaction is much more expensive than ILL borrowing costs. Therefore a $75 purchase-on-demand item would need to circulate as many as six times to break even with traditional ILL borrowing costs.…”

To buy or not to buy? A case study of Western books at Peking University Library

“…This acquisition method is known as "ILL-related purchase-on-demand (POD)" (Tyler, 2011;van Dyk, 2011).…”

In a world of Amazon, is it time to rethink ILL?

“…In examining some of the more recent literature and case studies on Purchase ILL programs, we discovered that such programs have commonalities, including similar goals, criteria, workflows and largely positive results. We looked specifically at case studies presented by the University of Hong Kong Libraries (Chan, 2004), University of Minnesota Law Library (Zopfi-Jordan, 2008), Washoe County Library System (Campbell, 2006), Brigham Young University Library (Van Dyk, 2011), University of Wisconsin-Madison and Purdue University (Ward et al, 2003).…”

“…• Goals: Most case studies began their Purchase ILL programs experimentally, with one or more of the following goals: -to save money (Chan, 2004;Campbell, 2006;Van Dyk, 2011;Ward et al, 2003;Zopfi-Jordan, 2008); -to build or fill gaps in the collection (Chan, 2004;Ward et al, 2003;Zopfi-Jordan, 2008); -to fill requests that would otherwise go unfilled (Ward et al, 2003); and/or -to provide more rapid turnaround time and delivery (Chan, 2004;Van Dyk, 2011;Ward et al, 2003;Zopfi-Jordan, 2008). …”

“…ILL staff would forward the request to Acquisitions, who would do the actual purchasing (Campbell, 2006;Van Dyk, 2011;Ward et al, 2003). In Zopfi-Jordan's case, ILL staff were authorized to purchase some items below a designated cost threshold.…”