Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Considering workflows - Coggle Diagram
Considering workflows
Identifying licencing as an issue
Libraries not being able to share records in NBK or Community Zone
Publishers not being able to share records that they have under licence
Not expecting anyone to give metadata away for free
Lobbying for a fairer way for libraries to pay for metadata
Some licences needing updating because of changes to technology and discovery layers
Plan M going some way to resolve issues
Record creators keen to protect investment
Issue is very contentious
Using the Community Zone
Recognising the impact of editing community zone records
Editing records helping other users
Only making minor corrections
Not receiving records directly from publishers or aggregators
If it's in the Community Zone it saves having to look elsewhere
Provides a quicker, faster, cheaper record
Acquisitions staff ordering through the Community Zone
Assessing quality in the Community Zone
Having shelf-ready records
Making processes more automated
Staff being able to to concentrate on the value-added bit
Focusing more on special collections
Being content to use shelf-ready as it is
Shelf-ready records improving in quality
Cataloguers enhancing records by hand (suppliers)
Cataloguers are presented with basic records to enhance
Adding additional subject headings
Checking author names for proper authorisations
Enhanced records are seen as the gold standard
Identifying cataloguing tasks
Creating/sharing/enriching metadata
Activating e-books
Checking Links/URLs
Assessing quality of records
Receiving metadata files from providers (suppliers)
Inconsistency in data format being an issue
Needing different methods for dealing with different formats
One data source often isn't enough
Needing confirmation across data sources
Data often messy and varying in quality
Libraries wanting records at the same time as e-books
Instantaneousness of e-books means records are wanted straight away
Wanting a record regardless of quality
Improving the record later
Around 50% of libraries wanting to wait for a better quality record
Having automation to create basic MARC records (suppliers)
Taking the metadata from providers
Choosing which elements to be in a basic MARC record