LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1 Archives

PCCTG1 Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1  May 2003

PCCTG1 May 2003

Subject:

Re: LC staffing of Coop

From:

Thompson A Yee <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 16 May 2003 08:25:48 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (62 lines)

Speaking for CPSO, the Coop staff perform the useful "first pass" review
of incoming SACO proposals with the intention of providing early notice
in the case of serious problems (duplication or conflict with existing
headings or references, lack of 670s, nonconformance with stated policy,
etc.) as well as the the critical function of bib file maintenance in
the LC catalog (searching for records to be changed and marking them for
updating) for headings and changes proposed through SACO.

Also, I don't feel that Coop staff are left holding the bag having to
"explain or justify" CPSO's decisions.  At the weekly editorial meetings
(always with a Coop colleague in attendance) and through consultation
with Coop staff on a daily as needed basis, the CPSO subject policy
specialists "explain and justify" (if necessary) with the full
expectation that this information will be shared with the contributing
institution.  Explanations of proposals that are not approved or made
resubmit are put in the weekly list minutes (Summary of Decisions).
CPSO does not have the staff resources to communicate individually with
SACO participants on a regular basis.

Tom

>>> [log in to unmask] 05/15/03 02:21AM >>>
Adam's point about Coop staffing is well made and I wouldn't disagree
with
its general thrust.

However, one thing I feel we can do is look to workflows that reduce
the
pressures on LC staff, and perhaps consequently eases the burden on
Coop.
So, for example, if (without prejudging the outcome of this group's
work) we
were to recommend minimum quotas, and the use of the utilities for
record
submission, perhaps proposals could bypass Coop entirely and be left
entirely for CPSO to deal with? Perhaps LC itself might want to look at
why
CPSO sets the rules, but Coop is left to try to explain or justify them
to
the participants (shouldn't CPSO be doing that??)? And the
consultant's
report identified a problem in the amount of handling that proposals
received within LC as an issue, as I recall.

So, whilst I agree with every last word that Adam wrote, I also feel
that we
can assist Coop to meet targets by proposing mechanisms and workflows
which
have the potential for reducing the burden on Coop staff.

I'm glad Adam raised this.

Hugh
--
Hugh Taylor
Head of Cataloguing, Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DR, England

email: [log in to unmask]   fax: +44 (0)1223 333160
phone: +44 (0)1223 333069 (with voicemail) or
phone: +44 (0)1223 333000 (ask for pager 036)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
October 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
December 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
June 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
July 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager