[DCRM-L] Cataloging production outcomes

[Deborah J. Leslie]

Exactly! Cataloging as a scholarly activity is what I was limping toward with my comparison of cataloging with writing. Thanks, David, for this articulation. I too agree with the non-distinction between "original" and "copy" cataloging for rare materials.

Regarding production numbers: I don't like them when they're quotas, strictly speaking, but can be very useful as production goals. It can help the cataloger manage the balance between speed and depth. E.g., Was the extra hour I just spent trying to identify a former owner of one book worth it, when I should get through 10 books this week?

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467


From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of David Richtmyer
Sent: Thursday, 03 November 2016 10:10
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Cataloging production outcomes

The problem with shoehorning rare book cataloging into production estimates, like the number of pies rolling off a factory assembly line, is that rare book cataloging is a scholarly activity. It requires research and often requires the cataloger to acquire some historical information that s/he did not possess prior to the item in hand landing on the desk. This seems to be lost on many library directors, who conceive of special collections cataloging as a clerical activity.

Sometimes a seemingly innocent little book will take an inordinate amount of time to properly peg, whilst at other times an incunable, because of the tremendously detailed amount of literature that has been written about same in the last century, will be a breeze. And I find the distinction between "copy" cataloging and "original" cataloging to be a bit of an outdated canard, a relic from OCLC in the 1970s. For example, often I'm forced, because of the one-record policy, to upgrade a very poor record. This sometimes takes longer to do than if I had been able to start with a clean sheet!

You might think because of my "harumph!" about quotas that I'm adamantly opposed to them. In point of fact I began my career working for a microfilm company that produced the Early English Books project (now EEBO), and we catalogers had a quota per day to complete. Though I never saw anyone disciplined because of not meeting those quotas, I did see the compromises those records sometimes had because of the policy. The quotas did, however, keep you focused, and that was a good thing.

So in the end a fine balance has to be struck, and having an enlightened management that understands both the need for productivity as well as quality is something that all libraries should strive for.

David

*****************************
David Richtmyer
Rare Books Cataloger & Jesuitica Librarian
Burns Library, Boston College
140 Commonwealth Avenue
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467-3801
617-552-0543

VNA VOX LIBRORVM,
sed non omnes aeqve
    ~ INFORMAT ~


On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Deborah J. Leslie <DJLeslie at folger.edu<mailto:DJLeslie at folger.edu>> wrote:
I had another thought about production estimates. If you are asked to draw up an estimate of the time needed to complete the cataloging, try to base it on actual work completed on similar collection items, to a similar standard, by similar staff levels. As Josie's post demonstrates, trying to estimate based on number of books an hour will take you down the rabbit hole every time.

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | 202.675-0369<tel:202.675-0369> | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu<http://folger.edu> | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467<http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467>


From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>] On Behalf Of Josie Caplehorne
Sent: Wednesday, 02 November 2016 05:38

To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Cataloging production outcomes

It sounds like you are doing tremendously well with what is a mammoth task!

I have recently completed cataloguing of a collection of 2,492 rare books and manuscripts for a UK Cathedral as part of a collaborative project with my institution.  I worked 36 hours p/w and my colleague work 18 hour p/w for the six months we were initially given to complete the task (May-October).  This was, as we anticipated, not an appropriate amount of time to catalogue a collection that would require attention to detail, careful handling and research as the collection dates back to the 10th century.

Our contracts were extended until December, at which point my colleague left the institution.  The cataloguing was still incomplete due other factors, as can be expected, so in the new year I worked alone to continue cataloguing until June when I was joined by a second cataloguer, and we both balanced this work with our other commitments. The cataloguing was completed last week, one year after the initial deadline.  I also worked on promoting the collection at exhibitions, conferences, to post-grad researchers, UG students and the wider public audience whilst undertaking the cataloguing.

My experience of this was very positive despite set-backs and balancing a number of tasks along the way.  Communication was key to the success of the collaboration and I built very positive relationships with key project staff, who in turn became very trusting of our judgement and undertaking of the task at hand, even with set-backs and contract extensions.

It’s challenging to summarize how successful this has been but I’d be happy to answer any questions you have about working with a collection on behalf of another organization.  I don’t want to go on and on if it’s not useful.


Josie Caplehorne | Metadata Assistant & Rochester Cathedral Cataloguer
Collections Management, Information Services, University of Kent
Templeman Library
Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NU
Tel: +44 (0)1227 816274<tel:%2B44%20%280%291227%20816274>

LibChats – innovation through discussion at the University of Kent<https://blogs.kent.ac.uk/libchats/>

P Save our trees! Please don't print out this e-mail unless absolutely necessary.

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: 01 November 2016 22:25
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Cataloging production outcomes

"All of us also handle other duties, such as reference questions, tour groups, exhibits, etc."
" The foundation board … want us to promote the collection and help researchers, in addition to cataloging."

This is going in the opposite direction of making progress on your backlog. The thing about cataloging is that it requires a different kind of mindset and attention than the other activities you mention. It has demands similar to writing: you need blocks of time with minimal distractions in which to immerse yourself.

Most catalogers I've known who also have significant other duties admit that cataloging always gets the shaft. Cataloging can't realistically be done in the interstices of reference, research assistance, public programming and outreach. The urgent crowds out the important. Add to that the time needed to power up into the zone, and before you know it, you're not cataloging anymore.

As for your numbers, they are something to be proud of. Think about inviting the board member to sit with you as you catalog a rare book.

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | 202.675-0369<tel:202.675-0369> | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu<http://folger.edu> | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467<http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467>


From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Allison Jai O'Dell
Sent: Tuesday, 01 November 2016 16:46
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Cataloging production outcomes

Having worked on special collections backlog projects at four different institutions (two academic, one museum, and one specialized research library) -- I would say that 2,000 items/year/person is about the best that one can do.  That's a little over 1 book/hour, and assumes that the person never attends meetings, gets sick, or takes a vacation.

When I worked as a contractor, the agency used an estimate of original record = 1 hour; copy record = half hour.  It sounds like your staff is hitting that estimate almost exactly.

At the University of Florida, our time estimates for cataloging rare material range from 1-4+ hours, depending on what sorts of access are needed, what research is involved, etc.  Each project/collection is discussed with its curator to ensure that we're meeting user needs and institutional expectations.  This also builds transparency regarding effort/time allocations.

Time estimates for 'general' collections cataloging are given on our website: http://cms.uflib.ufl.edu/CatDS/ServicesProvided


Hope that helps,
Allison

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Estelle Markel-Joyet <emarkel-joyet at amphilsoc.org<mailto:emarkel-joyet at amphilsoc.org>> wrote:
I'm no expert, but it took me 3 years to process roughly 5000 books (mostly original cataloguing). I'm pretty impressed with your numbers, quite frankly. Each one of those tasks requires a tonne of attention and care. As the old data-entry saying goes: "Garbage in - Garbage out." Sure, you could go faster, but who knows how many mistakes would occur and what that would mean for reference. If you pull any job ad for cataloguing, one of the top character traits of a good cataloguer is "attention to detail."

I don't envy your position, but I am in awe of your production.

Good luck.



On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Lawler, Martha <Martha.Lawler at lsus.edu<mailto:Martha.Lawler at lsus.edu>> wrote:
Hello all,

This topic has been discussed before, so my apologies for bringing it up again.  Our collection is actually owned by a private foundation and the foundation board have been very supportive of our work.  However, one member is questioning why it is taking so long to get everything cataloged.  The whole collection contains approximately 250,000 items and slightly more than 40,000 have been cataloged.  Up until two years ago, I was the only cataloger, so the foundation hired two more catalogers.  Together they add about 600 items to the online catalog per month and I add about 100.  At this point, most of what we do is copy-cataloging, which is done using rare book guidelines, even if the item is not particularly special.  I handle the more difficult materials and supervise the general workflow.  All of us also handle other duties, such as reference questions, tour groups, exhibits, etc.  As a faculty member and as the supervisor, I also have other duties that take time away from cataloging.

The foundation board, especially this particular member, want us to promote the collection and help researchers, in addition to cataloging, which is fine with us.  I have explained that those activities take away from cataloging and that the amount we accomplish is not too bad.  I have also explained that the extra attention to detail is not only what researchers need, but also creates a more precise inventory record.

I am curious to know how other institutions manage the cataloging workflow.  Are we going too slow?  The option of reducing the amount of detail is not what anyone wants.  How do you explain to benefactors (who are not familiar with library work, particularly cataloging) the amount of time and care it takes to create a truly beneficial product?

The board meets on Friday and I have been asked to create a report on the status of our cataloging.  I would like to be able to give some idea of how we compare to other cataloging departments.  Any thoughts, comments, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks so much in advance!

Martha M. Lawler, MLS
Principal Cataloger
James Smith Noel Collection
Louisiana State University Shreveport
Office: (318) 798-4163<tel:%28318%29%20798-4163>   Fax: (318) 797-5156<tel:%28318%29%20797-5156>
Martha.Lawler at lsus.edu<https://connect.emailsrvr.com/owa/redir.aspx?REF=H7FZ4RMQSGOZAqtO5bOiGQwgQEO0cV8uMkMZnkFraYD8iDSWaPTTCAFodHRwczovL2Nvbm5lY3QuZW1haWxzcnZyLmNvbS9vd2EvcmVkaXIuYXNweD9SRUY9WWxKdVZGQy1NLTRzYUtQeHlaQUF6QjQ4VU5ESFNpc1oyZDZCNXU5T2tlTWxVMUdiVl9UVENBRm9kSFJ3Y3pvdkwyTnZibTVsWTNRdVpXMWhhV3h6Y25aeUxtTnZiUzl2ZDJFdmNtVmthWEl1WVhOd2VEOVNSVVk5U2pkRmVVSmtRMmhoZWpGeGRXZFpNRkE1TUVOclJIazNZWGxKVTJKR09XbHNRakpWUVdOdGEyOXlRWE50Ylc1d2RsQlFWRU5CUm5SWlYyeHpaRWM0TmxSWFJubGtSMmhvVEd0NGFHUXllR3hqYTBKell6Tldla3h0Vm10a1VTNHU.>   www.lsus.edu<https://connect.emailsrvr.com/owa/redir.aspx?REF=PsGy8Nqvw75KmWiL7M41kQf8WCbmsj03-Qsxhf3nv3X8iDSWaPTTCAFodHRwczovL2Nvbm5lY3QuZW1haWxzcnZyLmNvbS9vd2EvcmVkaXIuYXNweD9SRUY9MUNkanh4SzVHTkpBQU5ZdEx0UmZ3Z1cyeS1vZm9GdUZLQzhQYUlVTW9JWWxVMUdiVl9UVENBRm9kSFJ3Y3pvdkwyTnZibTVsWTNRdVpXMWhhV3h6Y25aeUxtTnZiUzl2ZDJFdmNtVmthWEl1WVhOd2VEOVNSVVk5TUMxbVZpMU9PV0ZCY2swek9XSTVXbDlaWmxabmFsVldkbmQyZDAxUU9IRk1ORzR3U0U4NFZrRmhSWE50Ylc1d2RsQlFWRU5CUm05a1NGSjNUMms0ZG1RelpETk1iWGg2WkZoTmRWcFhVakZNZHk0dQ..>
[LSUS_Secondary_RGB Purple-Gold_email]




--
Estelle Markel-Joyet, MLIS
Assistant Head of Cataloguing
emarkel-joyet at amphilsoc.org<mailto:emarkel-joyet at amphilsoc.org>

American Philosophical Society
Benjamin Franklin Hall
427 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
http://www.amphilsoc.org/

APS Rights & Reproduction Policies:
http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/rights


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20161104/f90a4239/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1090 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20161104/f90a4239/attachment-0001.jpg>