Abstract
This paper describes a formula fitness review project at a top college library. It was discovered that the collection policy was very outdated and the allocation formula was no longer a good fit. Calculations had become arbitrary expressions of years of ad hoc annual adjustments. Although the formula was supposed to support multiobjective allocation decisions, this was not actually happening in an unambiguous fashion. Formula decomposition, formula simplification and multiattribute utility theory suggest that a change from the traditional allocation formulas—including abandoning aggregate topical allocations and FTE—despite the popularity of these variables—is probably in order.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge Arthur Downing and Baruch College of the City University of New York for the support that allowed both authors to conduct library materials allocation research. We would also like to thank the Newman Library for the special assistance with data collection and reporting.
Notes
1 It is interesting to note that no budget allocation appears to exist to fund collections that support any of the library's own credit courses, which include the information studies minor.
2 This category reflects the assumption that those allocated against are those who will make the heaviest use of the new purchases—and that ‘larger’ groups require a larger slice of the pie, regardless of domain, pedagogy or scholarship requirements. This assumption is so common that it urgently needs to be tested.
3 Example: Washburn University Library.
4 If this is in fact the case, then one variable—the easiest to collect—might be sufficiently predictive of ‘potential’ use. More granular (and more relevant) data may suggest problems with this assumption, but such data may not be sufficiently useful to justify collecting them.