be as high as $610,510. We would also have to cover the hosting fees for the converted journals. While the increased cost above the initially projected $25,000 would be minimal, the gradual conversion would result in some additional amortized cost burden for hosting fees. Not discussed in the budget summit presentation were the operational costs to the library. A table is included with this document that details the operational costs that occur as digital back-files are procured. It is estimated that the operational cost to the library if the conversion were accomplished in a single conversion would be $31,337.00. This cost estimate is derived based on time required to accomplish four essential conversion tasks: Volume Selection, which is the actual identification of the hard-bound volumes to be removed from the stacks, placing them on carts and transporting the volumes to the first floor for further processing; Cataloging, which is the time required to reprogram the catalog to reflect that the particular journal and volume of that journal is now digital rather than hard-bound; Processing and Recycling, which is the time required to strip the binding from the volumes since recycling plants will no longer accept hard-bound volumes, and readying the volume for pick-up by the recycler; and Shifting, which is moving those back- files of journals that are still hard-bound to empty shelves so that no longer needed shelving can be removed, and removing that shelving. If this conversion is spread out over five years, thus losing the economies of scale derived from a single conversion, the costs of the conversion more than double, rising to $68,897.00! The cost increases are primarily in three areas: Volume Selection, where there is a $20,160.00 difference between a single- year conversion and a five-year conversion; Processing and Recycling where there is a $10,112.00 difference between a single-year conversion and a 5- year conversion; and Shifting where there is a $7,022.00 difference between a single-year conversion and a 5-year conversion. An additional concern, is the likely expectation that would arise that the conversion should be addressed using the student library fee. As I noted in my presentation, the Library is probably 10 – 15 years behind other comparable institutions in its conversion to digital serial holdings (Zambare et al., 2009). This lag is further extended if the conversion occurs over five years. Moreover, a conversion accomplished over multiple years using the student fee ensures that the monograph collection becomes more outdated. I noted in my presentation that while costly, a single conversion would ultimately be the most efficacious approach resulting in a true cost efficiency over time. And I believe the cost estimates discussed above and presented in the accompanying tables further underscore that argument.
Page 4 of 6
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker