[ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due date on WRS transaction

Wed Sep 30 17:41:58 EDT 2009

WRS is the one thing that the borrower and lender have in common,
though. 

I can't see what information your library has in its separate ILL
tracking system, you can't see what we have in ours, but we can both go
to WRS for common information when needed. 

I feel strongly that we should all strive to keep transactions in WRS
current and accurate, following the workflow as it was designed to
function.

Cassie Maringer, Senior Library Assistant, Interlibrary Loans 
Washington County Cooperative Library Services (OQX) 
111 NE Lincoln St MS 58B, Hillsboro OR 97124-3036 
Phone: 503-988-5576  /  Fax 503-988-5221 
Email: cassiem at multcolib.org 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Peterson, Kim A.
	Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 1:56 PM
	To: Interlibrary Loan Listserv
	Subject: Re: [ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due date on WRS
transaction

	But I already look at WRS data "with skepticism" because WRS is
not our primary, authoritative record. WRS is not how we track lending
items. For us, the WRS record is only an indicator, it's not the
authoritative record on which we base responsibility, and that's both
for lending and borrowing.

	But I agree that the added info provided by WRS transaction data
can help in solving a problem. But if it's not there--the bottom line is
either we owe for a missing book or the borrowing library owes us
regardless of the presence of the WRS record.

	I think it's interesting how many defenders of record redundancy
we have here. Perhaps I'll start a thread about that.   :) 

	Kim Peterson
	St. Louis Public Library 

	 l Message-----
	From: ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org]On Behalf Of Hiebert, Greta
	Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 3:17 PM
	To: 'Interlibrary Loan Listserv'
	Subject: Re: [ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due date on WRS
transaction

		I agree with the workflow-specific responses so far and
would add this macro view of the issue: I believe this way of operating
reduces the trustworthiness of the ILL request system for everyone: if
even a few libraries undercut the tracking of item statuses, their
lending partners begin to look at all OCLC transaction data with
skepticism, and that reduces the value of the data. Seems to me that in
the Common Good scheme of things, the time your borrowers would spend
double-checking or second-guessing due dates, etc., would outweigh the
time-saving for you as a lender.

		Greta Hiebert

		Interlibrary Loan
interlib at bethelks.edu

		Bethel College Library                   ph:316.284.5303

		300 East 27th Street
fax:316.284.5843

		North Newton KS  67117               OCLC: KSB

		From: ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Peterson, Kim A.
		Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 2:30 PM
		To: Interlibrary Loan Listserv
		Subject: Re: [ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due date
on WRS transaction

		Re: Renewals 

		This is one of the main reasons why this option is
attractive to me because we do not renew. Even though our WRS policy
states "no renewals" we still get several renewal requests each day.
And, I do understand why, who really has time to read into a policy to
find out if the lending institution renews, it's just much easier to
send the renewal request. 

		Our loan period is 6 weeks. I think that's generous and
I'd prefer not to deal with renewal requests except in extraordinary
circumstances and then, I figure the borrowing library can place a phone
call to us.

		We do not recall items.

		We do not use WRS to track items, we use our internal
ILS for that.

		The information below about borrowers having to fill in
due date on their ILL  management software (which we do not have) is
useful because that gives me a picture of an additional step borrowers
have to do. 

		Kim Peterson

		St. Louis Public Library

		 -----Original Message-----
		From: ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org]On Behalf Of Sue Kaler
		Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 2:00 PM
		To: Interlibrary Loan Listserv
		Subject: Re: [ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due date
on WRS transaction

			Hi,

			I know there are places that do this.  It is
kind of a nuisance on the borrowing side.  We have to fill in the due
date on our ILL management software, since it reads that from WRS.
There is no record to use if we'd like to ask for a renewal.  There is
no record to use if you would like to recall the item.  There is no
record on OCLC to jog us when something becomes overdue (although there
are other reminders in our systems.)  You have less assurance as to
where in the process your item may be.  It does save routine work, but
leaves more possible problem solving work in the non-routine cases.  We
hope it does not become a very common practice although we understand
the appeal in this budget climate.

			Sue Kaler
			Interlibrary Loan Supervisor
			Wellesley Free Library
			530 Washington Street
			Wellesley, MA 02482
			OCLC symbol MLN
			skaler at minlib.net
			voice (781)235-1610 x1112, fax (781)237-4875

			When responding, please be advised that the Town
of Wellesley has 
			determined that email could be considered a
public record.

			-----Original Message-----
			From: " Peterson, Kim A." <KPeterson at slpl.org>
			To: <ill-l at webjunction.org>
			Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:49:23 -0500
			Subject: [ILL-L] contemplating a change: no due
date on WRS transaction

			One library that lends to us regularly does
something that I think is a clever labor savings step: they set up the
WRS transaction for returnables with a due date of "N/A" so that the WRS
transaction disappears when I receive it.

			I can't remember how they let us know the due
date--I think it's indicated on the accompanying paperwork.

			From there we send the book out to our patron,
and when patron returns item we ship it back to lender. There's no WRS
transaction to update to "returned" and the lender doesn't have to
"complete" the transaction.

			What kind of problems does this create for you
all? I like it, but I wonder if it will result in issues for you all
that I can't foresee. 

			Comments, please. 

Kim Peterson
Director of Technical Services
St. Louis Public Library
1301 Olive St.
St. Louis, MO 63103
T: 314-539-0320
www.slpl.org <http://www.slpl.org/>  

 St. Louis Public
Library<http://www.slpl.org/images/slpl_email_logo.gif> 

Know Better 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/ill-l/attachments/20090930/72a95e5d/attachment.htm>