Building collections in a bad economy

["Joseph Esposito" <espositoj@gmail.com>]

I have been pondering several of the public statements about 
collection-building in these very difficult times and have been 
struck by the fact that there is little discussion of testing 
on-demand services.  I say "testing" advisedly, as a 
comprehensive on-demand system is bound to throw up unanticipated 
items, and it is best to solve a problem with a small set of 
elements rather than a large one.

By "on-demand" I refer to the practice of only purchasing 
something when it is actually used.  This is not the norm with 
libary publications, of course, where most publishers sell things 
that include many components that are literally never used.  I 
know there is a case to be made for collecting everything even if 
some parts are never used, but it is a case I personally find it 
hard to make.

There are at least three large problems with establising an 
on-demand service; and if we spend a few minutes on this problem, 
we will find three more.  The first is simply the systems issues, 
which cannot be underestimated.  To sell things by use requires 
reliable systems that enable proper feedback, without endangering 
the privacy of individual users.  This means publishers would 
have to "look" into libraries' internal systems.  The second is 
the back-end production process on the publishers' parts.  When 
we say "on-demand," at what point in the process is the demand 
created?  Print on demand?  Digitization on demand? And what the 
heck, how about authoring on demand?

And then there is the arena of endless argument, the third point, 
which is pricing.  For an on-demand system to work, individual 
units would cost more, perhaps MUCH more, than their pro rata 
share of collections.  Think of the world of the audio CD.  A CD 
costs $10 for ten songs.  Therefore there is an erroneous 
expectation (call this The iTunes Fallacy) that each song should 
cost $1.  When the numbers are crunched, however, two or three 
songs will cost $3 or $4, and the rest will, in a special sense, 
be free--free because no one wants them.  (I listened to Bob 
Dylan's "Freewheelin'" album today while jogging:  15 for 15. 
What a batting average, what a bargain!)

I don't believe on-demand purchasing will lower libraries' costs. 
I believe that on-demand will better align the expenditures to 
patrons' use.  If I may borrow (or abuse) a phrase from 
economics, this is "hedonic" price adjustment, where the quality 
improves even if the cost does not rise.

We will inevitably be moving in this direction.  The operative 
word is "inevitably."  Therefore in these very difficult times 
for everyone, we should get started, when the motivation to try 
just about anything is keener than in the fat times.  Seven years 
from now we will regret not having taken action.

Joe Esposito