DDA turnaround was 18 calendar days after initial user selection. Fastest turnaround was 3 days and slowest was well over 100 days.
Given the sizable difference in firm orders analyzed (16,232) versus DDA (666), we cannot say DDA usage is considerably better than firm order usage.
In some cases, RSLs are doing as well or a better job selecting titles than our users.
DDA print purchases are not guaranteed usage.
KSL tested notifying users when books were available versus automatically adding books to the stacks. Surprisingly, the books put on hold circulated worse on average than the titles users had to proactively retrieve.
Try specialized print DDA plans revolving around new faculty specialties and growing departments.
Investigate print DDA as connected to ILL.
Strive for a quicker print turnaround.
DDA ebooks are 8 times more likely to be used than firm ordered ebooks.
DDA ebook usage was significantly better across all subjects.
DDA users viewed over $45,500 worth of content that went unpurchased.
Only 26% of all DDA purchases were ebooks.
Moving away from firm ordered ebooks and to a DDA model will demonstrate fiscal responsibility while meeting user needs. Particularly in subject areas where ebooks are embraced and regularly used.
DDA models could allow RSLs to repurpose unspent funds on expensive wish list items at the end of fiscal years.
Less RSL time spent on selecting individual titles allows for more time spent on faculty outreach and research assistance.
Investigate other DDA providers and publishers to best meet user needs.
Flexibility is key when implementing DDA. Expect hiccups and setbacks.
Subject profiles were too limited. Broaden profiles to discover trends and user needs.
Closer budget monitoring, potentially forgoing an initial deposit.
Limitations of ILS, what we could and could not measure.
RSLs were allowed to firm order against items in the DDA and we question to what extent we would allow this again.
Evidence-based research and analysis can lead libraries to meaningful change.