Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Time:    8 am EST /  2 pm CET / 1 pm UK

Call in Number:     https://zoom.us/j/995679876 

Meeting URLhttps://zoom.us/j/995679876 Password needed: please see link below

https://wiki.folio.org/display/COMMUNITY/FOLIO+Meetings+with+Zoom

 

ERM Sub SIG Folio Wiki: https://wiki.folio.org/display/RM/ERM+Sub+Group 

Google Folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17X3tr6siZH8iS07kGcjAqUNl01zVrJmB

Terms and definitions: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vue-mbcULpZivWu69a7nAZEdC-H2yXPQqSblbL_0J6U

Slack Channel: # erm-team

Agenda Sep 1st 2021

Convener: Martina T.

Notetaker: Martina S.

Housekeeping

  • All: Please edit the attendees list below and indicate when you are there!
  • Next ERM meeting:  Sep 8th
    • looking for volunteers to describe how Agreements vs. Agreement Lines are used to handle different use cases
    • looking for volunteers for a FOLIO Forum: in a panel presentation on how FOLIO libraries are managing ERM & acquisitions, specifically:

      • walking through the acquisition of a new e-resource start to finish (ordering, invoicing, activation, and agreement tracking)
      • walking through a renewal from an orders/invoices/agreement perspective
      • maintaining changes in title lists year over year
  • all questions and topics for the ERM implementers meeting can be posted on this confluence page: https://wiki.folio.org/display/RM/ERM+implementers 
  • Open discuss posts: right now no new posts regarding erm


Agenda items:

  1. Development progress - ERM sprint 121
  2. Agreements vs. Agreement Lines - use cases, scenarios and questions for feedback from the group (Felix and Jessica)


Minutes

Development progress

  • ERM sprint 121
  • ERM sprint 121 is extended until today instead of last Friday due to holidays
  • ERM sprint 122 starts tomorrow - till the end of next week
  • focussing on smaller UX improvements, bug fixes and tidy-ups

Agreements vs. Agreement Lines

Presenter: Felix - ZBW_structuring_agreements.pdf

  • Structuring agreements in ZBW - located in Northern Germany
  • had to take different types of collections and licenses into consideration
  • using internal KB and GOKb; not using eholdings
  • Local collections: titles directly subscribed via publisher/vendor
    • One order per title
    • one agreement per publisher/content provider and publication type
    • one agreement line per agreement
    • examples: Cambridge University Press: E-Journals or Sabinet: E-Journals
  • Single subsrciptions
    • subscribed via publisher or vendor 
    • one order per title
    • one invoice for each title or collective invoice
    • one agreement per platform
    • linking packages
    • if multiple titles subscribed individually on same platform, they are managed in one agreement
    • one agreement line per agreement
    • linking packages
    • example: Brill: E-Journals 
  • reason: an agreement can change over time
    • use cases 
    • a single subscription can become a local collection (local collection = more than 4 titles)
    • package subscriptions ends and an individual subscription of a few titles is desired
      • using the internal KB there is the concept of access start and end dates that can be used here
    • package subscriptions ends and an individual subscription of a few titles is desired (consortial/publisher package)
    • PCA agreements: one active agreement with subscribed content and one PCA agreement
  • consortia licenses
    • multiple agreements - one per year
    • due to constraints to external consortial licenses management system
    • there is work going on on an integration with this external system that may improve the possibilities of structuring related agreements in Folio
  • publisher packages
    • purchased directly from publisher
    • multiple agreements - one per collection; e.g. one collection per year = one agreement line per year
    • example: Springer E-Books: Economics and Finance


  • all e-resurces covered by the agreement lines are displayed in a table below the agreement line
  • POLs can only be added to agreement lines, not the e-resources covered by the agreement line
  • ZBW is not using Folio acquisitions just now
  • but will be using at some point and took possibilities to link to POLs into consideration when deciding on the agreement structure
  • usage statistics: how usage statistics will work is not clear yet; there is a working group in Folio working on it


  • Jack in chat: Sorry if I missed this - once something becomes a local collection do you only receive one invoice from the provider?
    • Felix in chat: yes
  • Sara in chat: Do you have Agreements for other things than e-journals or e-books, like e-scores, or online resource or some such
    • Felix: not yet
    • focussing on getting data into Folio and structuring it
    • currently there is no ERM system that is used
    • get colleagues on board
    • ZBW mainly has e-books and e-journals when it comes to electronic content
    • databases will be taken into consideration (seem simple - one title per agreement)
    • aggregators: ZBW does not plan to manage all thousands of titles within the datatbases in Folio; just the database
    • Owen in chat: Or you could even do without a resource? Just an Agreement line with a description?
    • Felix: will the description in this case be included in an export
      • Owen: no, it will not be - but it would not be a big thing to change
      • Sara: if the data does not come out that would be problematic

Presenter: Jessica - link to document? - will be added

Example one

  • Adam Matthew one time purchases
    • Some have continuing access fees, some don’t
    • Those that do have ongoing fees have differing renewal dates
      • Examples:
        • Confidential Print: Middle East 1839-1969
        • Colonial America
        • Apartheid South Africa 1948-1980
        • Eighteenth Century Journals II
  • Jack in chat: Each Adam Matthew database for us is a separate agreement - we don't get many but we're just treating them as individual resources with individual agreements
  • one agreement with one agreement line; would attach one POL 
  • Owen in chat: The Adam Matthews ones are complex in that respect I think - because they tend to bring together a set of resources
  • Sara: renewal date has not come into play for us
  • group things by renewal date to keep things together
  • Owen in chat: This rule doesn’t seem unreasonable to me, but I think it’s important to say that in Folio terms, the renewal date tracking is actually on the POL which links to an Agreement Line
  • Owen: we do not specifically have renewal dates in agreements; there is a concept in orders app; decided to leave subscripin aspect to acquisitions
  • in terms of dashboard querying: it is the agreement end date that is relevant

Example two

  • EBSCO Magazine Archives one time purchases
    • Different POs, all have ongoing access fees that renew at different dates
      • Examples: Bloomsberg Businessweek, Forbes, Fortune, New Republic, Atlantic, National Review
  • Kristin: can see advantages of having them all under one agreement; including usage fees
  • Jack: see that as different subscriptions = different agreements; keep things separate

Example three

  • Oxford Research Encyclopedias (separate subscriptions)
    • Same renewal dates, different POs, all subscribed through one consortium (but what if they weren’t?), differing #s of simultaneous users.
  • Sara: group together and make notes; one publisher, one platform; have everything in one place
  • but can only have one vendor per agreement; eventually will link them in and decide on the primary one
  • currently makes notes that both are vendors
  • can put name of vendors in th ename field and can thereby search for them
  • Owen would split down due to different number of concurrent users
  • there is always more than one way of doing it
  • Kristin in chat: What would you do, Jack?
  • Jack in Slack chat: I saw your question right as the meeting ended - I was eating my bagel and gave up typing! For the encyclopedia example we have something similar with Elsevier and Wiley reference titles. We don't pay for them as a package but they're all similar enough and have the same access restrictions, licensing, etc. that I attached them as AGLs (and will some day add POLs) and have notes where needed to point out where the subscription periods diverge. I basically just treat the agreement as the wrapper and have next to no information and put it all on the AGL. It is going to be interesting if we ever buy one of them through NERL or WALDO though - by my logic with Adam Matthew I should create a new agreement but I don't know if I would bother since to me a reference title has less management required than a database or eJournal package. That may be because of our local workflows though.
  • will continue with the examples in one of our next meetings

Chat

Von Owen Stephens an alle:  02:18 PM
But you can only have a POL per agreement line still

So this is like clicking through to eHoldings to see the list - it’s a bit of a shortcut to that display

Von Jack Mulvaney an alle:  02:21 PM
Sorry if I missed this - once something becomes a local collection do you only receive one invoice from the provider?
Von Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) an alle:  02:21 PM
Do you have Agreements for other things than e-journals or e-books, like e-scores, or online resource or some such

Von Owen Stephens an alle:  02:27 PM
I believe this is a difference between the Internal KB and the EBSCO KB - afaik the EBSCO KB doesn’t have this “access end date” concept defining a date when a title ceased being part of a package

But the Agreement Line Active From / Active To date are available whichever KB you use

Von Owen Stephens an alle:  02:37 PM
Or you could even do without a resource? Just an Agreement line with a description?

Von Felix Hemme (ZBW) an alle:  02:43 PM
@Jack re. "once something becomes a local collection do you only receive one invoice from the provider" -> yes.

Von Jack Mulvaney an alle:  02:44 PM
Each Adam Matthew database for us is a separate agreement - we don't get many but we're just treating them as individual resources with individual agreements

Von Owen Stephens an alle:  02:46 PM
This rule doesn’t seem unreasonable to me, but I think it’s important to say that in Folio terms, the renewal date tracking is actually on the POL which links to an Agreement Line

Von Owen Stephens an alle:  02:52 PM
The Adam Matthews ones are complex in that respect I think - because they tend to bring together a set of resources

Von Kristin Martin (she/her) an alle:  02:57 PM
What would you do, Jack?

Attendees list

Present

Name

Home Organization


Aaron Neslin

UMass


Abigail Wickes

Duke University Libraries


Alaina Jones 

Duke


Alice Daugherty

University of Alabama


Alistair Morrison

Johns Hopkins University Libraries


Amanda Cornwell

Johns Hopkins University Libraries


Amelia Sutton

UMass


Andrea Meindl

UB Regensburg


Ann-Marie Breaux

EBSCO


Annika Schröer

UB Leipzig


Anu Moorthy

Duke


Anya Arnold

EBSCO

x

Beate Aretz

Stabi Berlin

x

Benjamin Ahlborn

SuUB Bremen


Birgit Neumann

Björn Muschall

UB Leipzig


Carole Godfrey

EBSCO


Catherine Tuohy

Emmanuel College 


Charlotte Whitt

Index Data


Claudia Malzer

ULB Darmstadt, Developer


Dennis Bridges

EBSCO


Dwayne Swigert

Missouri State University

x

Emma Raub 

Cornell


Eric Hartnett

Texas A&M University

x

Felix Hemme

ZBW Kiel


Frances Webb

Cornell, Developer

x

Gill Osguthorpe

UX/UI Designer - K-Int

x

Gisela Weinerth

SUB Hamburg


Heather Thoele

Texas A&M University


Ian Ibbotson

Developer Lead - K-Int

x

Jack Mulvaney

UMass


Jag Goraya

K-Int

x

Janet Ewing

Five Colleges / Mount Holyoke College Library


Jenna Lantermann

Five Colleges / Smith College 


Jenna Strawbridge

Duke

x

Jessica Harris

Chicago


Jir Shin Boey

Missouri State University


Joe Sikowitz

Fenway Library Organization


Johann Rolschewski

ZDB, Berlin


Johanna RaddingFive Colleges / Amherst College

Julie Brannon

Duke


Kathleen Berry

UMass Amherst

x

Kathleen Norton

Five Colleges / Mount Holyoke College Library


Katrin Brüggemann

UB Leipzig


Khalilah Gambrell

EBSCO


Kirstin Kemner-Heek  

VZG, Göttingen


Kristen Wilson

Index Data

x

Kristin Martin

Chicago


Kyle Banerjee

EBSCO
x

Lars-Hakan Herbertsson

Chalmers


Laura Wright

Cornell University


Lindsey Lowry

University of Alabama


Lindsey Taggert

Missouri State University


Luca Lanzillo

Sapienza Library System - Sapienza University of Rome


Maike Osters

hbz, Cologne


Mara Egherman

EBSCO


Marie Widigson

Chalmers


Mariyam Thorhira

Johns Hopkins University Libraries


Marjorie Snyder



Mark Arnold

Missouri State University


Mark Deutsch

Duke

x

Martina Karlsson

Chalmers

x

Martina Schildt

VZG, Göttingen

x

Martina Tumulla

hbz, Cologne


Mary O’Brien



Matthieu Bordet

DMCultura, Ravenna, Italy

x

Molly Driscoll

EBSCO


Moritz Horn

VZG, Göttingen

x

Nancy Finn


x

Nancy Pelis

Five Colleges / Mount Holyoke College Library

x

Norma Flores

Texas A&M University

Olga Harder

TIB Hannover

x

Owen Stephens

Product Owner -  Owen Stephens Consulting


Paul Trumble

Amherst


Peter Böhm

HeBIS, Frankfurt

x

Peter McCracken

Cornell


Robert SchreierCollege of the Holy Cross

Rüdiger Stratmann

IAI SPK Berlin

          

Sabine Howahl

ULB Darmstadt

x

Sabrina Bayer

UB Regensburg

x

Sara Colglazier

Five Colleges / Mount Holyoke College Library

x

Sarah Dennis

Texas A&M University


Sarah Morgenstern-Einenkel

UB Leipzig


Scott Stangroom

UMass


Siobhan McManamon

Five Colleges / Smith College


Sobha Duvvuri

EBSCO


Stew MacLehose

University of New England

x

Susanne Schuster

BSZ Konstanz


Tatjana Clemens

UB Frankfurt


Theodor Tolstoi

Chalmers, EBSCO


Tracy Patton

Missouri State University


Virginia Martin

Duke University Libraries


Xiaoyan (Yan) Song

NCSU


Yvonne Mönkediek

SuUB Bremen




  • No labels