ACQNET 7.3: 2ND Comment on Hawaii Contract

[Pat Wallace <DENWALL@AOL.COM>]

Forward from  Patricia D. Wallace,  Chair, Hawaii Working Group
(ALA Social Responsibility Round Table /Alternatives in Print Division)
Denwall@aol.com
The following message has been cross-posted; please excuse any
duplication.

SEE MY EARLIER FORWARD dated 1-9-97 WHICH THE MESSAGES
BELOW RESPOND TO:

>From: Eleanor Cook (Appalachian State U.) <cookei@appstate.edu>
>To: acqnet-l@listserv.appstate.edu (acquisitions/ technical
> services listserv)
>Subject: ACQNET 7:2:Subject: Baker & Taylor's Outsourcing Contract
   with the   Hawaii Public Library System: a Summary
>Date: JAN 6, 1997
************************************************************************
From: ELEANOR COOK <COOKEI@conrad.appstate.edu>
To: acqnet-l@listserv.appstate.edu
Subject: ACQNET 7:3:
Comment on Hawaii Contract with Baker & Taylor
Date: Jan 18, 1997

ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 3, January 19, 1997 -- ISSN: 1057-5308

=========================================
The five responses will be forwarded as a multi-part post.
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P](
POST #2
From: Joyce L. Ogburn (Old Dominion U.)
<ogburn@shakespeare.lib.odu.edu>
Subject: Comment on Baker & Taylor Contract in Hawaii
Date: Jan 8, 1997

     I have finally had the chance to read through all the messages
regarding the Hawaii contract and controversy.

     My first reaction is that what is on e-mail is not the whole
story. We don't have access to the contract, the full data, and the
point of view of the administration. It is a story, and it is pertinent
to cover it on ACQNET and quickly, as Eleanor hopes. Getting other
points of view is extremely important. So this should only be the first
message from ACQNET and there should be follow up from other
sources. I hope that the responses from our readers will also be
enlightening.

     I can suggest that the editorial board compose some thoughtful
questions and a request for clarification on a number of issues.
For example, who is administering the contract?  Who is responsible
for  monitoring B&T's performance and compliance? What are the
ramifications of noncompliance or grounds for resolving
disagreement?  How long does B&T have to refine their service?
How does the quality of the startup compare with starting a new
approval plan or outsourcing some cataloging? What does cataloging
include?  Authority control? If the cost of $20.94 includes the
cataloging costs, why isn't that being discussed?  How does this
compare with previous costs to purchase and process items? Other
issues I haven't read about are whether every location is getting
the same materials or whether they are tailored to each location.
Was there a profile developed like an approval plan?  Or what other
information was provided?

     Being an administrator I can see the dilemma of bringing in
such a contract.  No one will be happy in the system, no matter how
it is introduced or administered.  But were there any open
hearings?  Who developed the RFP?  Who had input on the choice of
vendor?  What happens in 5 1/2 years?

     This incident is very threatening to all of us.  How can we  get past
the emotion and on to rational exploration?

     As an aside, I also noticed that the Hawaii Working Group does
not include an acquisitions librarian.  Should we suggest one be
appointed? [We suggest Barbara Winters as a consultant, but do not
know if this suggestion will be taken]

Joyce L. Ogburn
AUL for Information Resources and Systems
University Library/ Old Dominion University
Norfolk VA 23529
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]