National Resource Sharing Working Group
Interlibrary Loan and Document Delivery Benchmarking Study
See also:
Main report: PDF version (1.423MB) or Word2000 format (557KB)
Appendices: PDF version (1.057MB) or Word2000
format (399KB)
Executive summary
[This Executive Summary is an extract from the Main report.]
The Interlibrary Loan and Document Delivery (ILL/DD) Benchmarking Study was undertaken by the National Resource Sharing Working Group with the assistance of the National Library of Australia. It is the largest and most comprehensive study ever undertaken of ILL/DD operations in Australian libraries. The results are of relevance to all library sectors.
Aims and methodology
The key aims of the study were to:
- identify the characteristics of high performing ILL/DD operations,
- be an instrument for raising awareness and changing ILL/DD practices, and
- assist any library to benchmark its operations against a standard set of data.
Turnaround time, fill rate and unit cost were used as the main performance measures for requesting activities, and fill rate and unit cost were used for supply. Some data for supplying turnaround time was also collected. The relative importance placed on these measures may vary from sector to sector. Definitions of the measures are included in Section 3.2.
Ninety-seven libraries from all states and territories and sectors were surveyed. Data from ninety was included in the main part of the analysis. The data was analysed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and the findings corroborated by a detailed analysis of the high performing requesting and supplying ILL/DD operations.
Summary of performance
While the study identified high performing libraries, none were in the top 10 per cent in all performance criteria. The table below provides the average performance overall and for each sector against the key measures.
| Performance measure | Combined | National/State | University | Special | Public |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| REQ turnaround time |
11.5 days | 12.5 days | 10.8 days | 8.7 days | 16.6 days |
| SUP turnaround time | 6.2 days | 6.3 days | 5.3 days | 5.8 days | 8.0 days |
| REQ fill rate | 89% | 79% | 89% | 96% | 83% |
| SUP fill rate | 83% | 88% | 77% | 91% | 79% |
| REQ total unit cost | $32.10 | $79.99 | $35.21 | $24.76 | $18.98 |
| SUP total unit cost | $17.03 | $20.13 | $18.47 | $15.20 | $16.21 |
| REQ patron satisfaction | |||||
| Timeliness | 97% | 95% | 96% | 97% | 97% |
| Quality | 97% | 98% | 97% | 98% | 96% |
Table 1: Summary of performance: averages
Key results and recommendations
The factors that maximise performance are listed in Section 5 of the main report. There are five recommendations based on these factors:
Examine workflows to ensure there are as few steps as possible
The most efficient libraries had the least number of steps involved in obtaining an item. This may involve patrons creating their own requests electronically, and aiming to obtain over 90% of items from the first library approached.
Implement an automation package
Automation was a decisive factor in every performance criterion, literally saving days in turnaround time and reducing unit costs. Automating any part of ILL/DD operations was influential in increasing efficiency and effectiveness, from having the patron create the request to delivering electronic copies to their desktop. Automation is a marginal cost compared to staff costs. Large gains can be made for a relatively small investment particularly when automation is combined with the streamlining of processes.
Ensure ILL/DD staff are well-trained in resources and systems
Staff are the major contributor to unit costs. Maximising their competency and efficiency has the potential to create the greatest savings. Investment in training to produce expert searchers who are knowledgeable about key resources contributes to a faster and more effective service. It may also provide opportunities to offer new services without increasing costs.
Add and maintain holdings on union catalogues
Libraries are more efficient suppliers when requests for items they do not hold are minimsed, and are more effective requestors with access to up-to-date information about other libraries' collections. Both are achieved when libraries add accurate and up-to-date holdings information to major union catalogues. A commitment by libraries and encourgement by the library community to contribute in this way is required.
Investigate cooperative agreements with key libraries
Well-regulated cooperative agreements assist the efficient delivery of an effective service where:
- there are no fees;
- holdings are easily and electronically available and other collections are well known to members;
- a single electronic system is used to enter and track requests;
- a majority of requests are filled within the agreement;
- transactions are reasonably high and fairly distributed; and
- members cooperate to ensure the system works smoothly.
Benefits include reductions in administrative costs and a greater availability of material for patrons where there are more liberal lending policies in place between libraries.
