Service Quality Improvement Council

September 20, 2000

Agenda

1. Announcements, questions, future agenda items

2. Progress report on public printing (Sandy Peterson)

3. Report on plans for a SQIC public forum (Paul Stuehrenberg, Holly Grossetta Nardini, Danuta Nitecki)

Minutes

Present: Sue Crockford-Peters, Suzanne Eggleston, Holly Grossetta Nardini, Danuta Nitecki, Sandy Peterson, Rich Richie, Andy Shimp, Paul Stuehrenberg (chair), Joan Swanekamp

Absent: Katie Bauer, Emily Horning, Fred Martz, Martha Smalley

I. Announcements.

• Paul Stuehrenberg announced that plans for rethinking the future of the Service Quality Improvement Council were shared with the Library Management Council (LMC) earlier in the day. LMC members were invited to help shape the agenda of the proposed brainstorming sessions (open forum and retreat). No suggestions were recorded at the LMC meeting.

• The subject of the Service Quality Awards was briefly touched upon. A yulib-l message had been sent out by the Service Quality Award Committee urging staff to attend the ceremony on 5 October. It was asked whether supervisors of award recipients will be contacted to ensure their attendance at the event. Danuta Nitecki responded that the winners' names will be announced on yulib-l prior to the ceremony. She had suggested that the Service Quality Award Committee chair, Charlie Greenberg, touch base with the Council for comments on arrangements for this year's awards ceremony. Sandy Peterson added that invitations will be issued to both recipient and supervisor. The Staffing Issues Group was congratulated for its work in propelling this initiative forward.

II. Public Printing Task Force.

Sandy reported on the findings of the Public Printing Task Force. The Task Force was charged in January 2000 with working out a service program to provide public computer laser printing for readers; investigating options for contracting networked laser printing services; recommending a cost recovery plan; and presenting an assessment strategy to gauge the success of the service. Attributes of a desirable laser printing schema included:

• Availability of laser printing services on cost recovery basis by which all expenses for providing the library-wide service will be covered;

• Availability of laser printing services at all locations with public workstations;

• Same payment method at each service site;

• Consistent and high quality service at all times that library sites are open, including evenings and weekends;

• Consistent and high quality printing to readers.

Vendors were researched, and two were chosen as possible options: RIS, which employs UNITPRINT software, and COPICO, which uses ITC software. It was decided to drop Nelinet as a possible vendor because it could not guarantee on-site service. Advantages and drawbacks of the two proposed options were discussed.

COPICO

• 24 hours a day, 7 days a week service

• uniform payment method

• cash service on-site.

RIS

• service available only during business hours

• per station minimum volume of output required (library is to provide the paper for printouts)

• no return on profits

• need to go to three separate off-site locations to add to print cards

Other institutions with experience using COPICO (including the New York Public Library and Texas A&M) have noted 1) high quality of service, 2) generally good response time for addressing service problems (Sue Crockford-Peters remarked that response time for photocopier services is generally 4 hours), and 3) no difficulties when using different platforms, though most neglected to keep statistics to more accurately assess services. However, significant library systems support will be required. Use of COPICO would involve considerable financial commitment - the library would have to provide a server (approximately 15) at each location. With a projected cost of $2000 per site, the library would be responsible for an outlay of $30,000 for the server alone. Installation of ethernet connections would cost an additional $200 per unit. All installation work at the library end would be completed by local systems support (i.e., Library Systems staff). It was estimated that installation by staff who are unfamiliar with installation procedures would require 3-days per site. All non-network problems are to be handled for local support staff. [Sandy noted that once the set-up has been installed, maintenance is not expected to be a big investment.] Print cards can be purchased on-site. Paper and toner will be supplied by the vendor. Lastly, COPICO requires a 5-year contract for service.

With regard to RIS, research indicates that 1) the quality of printing services is high, 2) response time is poor, 3) difficulties may be encountered when using different platforms (in particular, pdf), 4) maintenance of machines will be contracted out to another company, and service will be limited to conventional business hours. In addition, ITS clusters will not be considered part of the service package, including printers in CCL and Kline. Given the minimum required output of 240,000 per 12 month cycle, without the inclusion of printing at the computer clusters and even with the inclusion of printing at Medical, it was determined that it would be unlikely that the library could maintain this level of commitment. If the minimum is not met, the library would be responsible for paying RIS for the "missing" printouts.

The Public Printing Task Force recommended not pursuing an agreement with RIS. COPICO was preferred despite the required investment of library resources. Other options cited were

• handling printing services on our own [Sandy cautioned that the Medical Library has reported that their costs have skyrocketed and that they too are looking into COPICO - this option may not account for long-term needs.]

• not offering laser printing as a primary, essential service - have readers download documents and print elsewhere; provide vending machines stocked with computer disks; improving the printers that the library already has in place.

Danuta Nitecki suggested testing COPICO services at a few sites, and rolling-out a comprehensive, library-wide strategy after assessing the results of the trial-run. Sue Crockford-Peters added that whatever arrangement is worked out, laser printers should be easy to use and self-evident.

Next steps for the Task Force included:

• Examining added costs of working with COPICO (total revenue required; cost to break even; cost to user)

• Identifying two or three sites for which statistics on laser print output are available for the trial-run (Medical, Social Science, and the Periodicals Reading Room were recommended as possible test sites; it was decided to not include the Nave area because of its low print volume)

• Reviewing scenarios with various print outputs and projecting costs over a period of time

Sue Crockford-Peters suggested assessing at this time the library's dependence on COPICO and pinpointing problems that library staff have already encountered in dealings with COPICO. More copy card devices are needed, as are more options for copy payment (e.g. credit cards). It was decided to attach costs for the proposed laser printing arrangement with COPICO to the next equipment request cycle.

III. SQIC Public Forum.

Plans for the fall series of Council-sponsored events were reviewed. There will be one open forum relating to the structure and objectives of the Council. Staff will be asked to provide input on the future direction of SQIC. The open forum will be followed by an "analysis group" including experts in the field of service quality that will meet for half a day. Council members were asked to suggest names for inclusion in the analysis group. Holly Grossetta Nardini requested that anything not captured in the notes of the 9-6-00 meeting should be forwarded to her. She announced that she will chair the forum.

Paul informed the Council that Suzanne Lorimer will attend the next SQIC meeting to present a status report on the current work of the Document Delivery Group. The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.