Collaborative collections management is one aspect of library resource sharing. It is a planning strategy that libraries use to provide for their users materials and information that they cannot afford to have on site. In its basic form, collaborative collections management occurs when two or more libraries collaborate in the acquisition and/or maintenance of collections. The libraries may, for example, share responsibilities within subject or format areas. In one project, libraries shared responsibility for in-depth coverage of the Mexican states that border the U. S. By sharing both collections dollars and collection development expertise, the libraries were able to provide much deeper coverage of these states than anyone of them might have done on their own. In another project, libraries shared responsibility for acquiring expensive, low-use science translation journals and were able to reallocate thousands of dollars to other collections purposes.

Why is collaborative collections management necessary?

Collaborative collections management is an important strategy for coping with the serious chronic problems that virtually all U. S. libraries are facing: skyrocketing costs, level and declining collections budgets, and the proliferation of information in all formats. Most libraries have canceled hundreds, even thousands of subscriptions and cut back in other collecting areas. New formats are often expensive and beyond budgetary reach. Collaboration provides a managed approach to regaining ground lost to these generally inflationary trends.

Isn't collaborative collections management just another way of describing the current battle between access and ownership?

It is not so much a battle as an inevitable shift. In the current environment, most libraries will be able to afford less and less of the available pool of information each year. If these libraries do nothing, they will be more and more dependent on access. If they plan collaborative strategies, they will at least be shaping the nature of that dependence. Collaboration can also be viewed as a strategy for increasing ownership, if you conceive of the consortium as the owners.

Faculty and other serious library users want and need materials on site. No matter how well it's planned, access through collaborative collection development simply isn't as good as on-site access.

Collaborative collections management is not meant to substitute for adequate local collections. Even though for many purposes access to remote collections or to information in electronic rather than print form is acceptable, few would argue that it is preferable to on-site collections. Having to wait for something that you need right now or to access it in a format that you dislike can be very frustrating. Realistically, however, most libraries have little choice: as buying power declines so does the ability to build on-site collections. Either they will continue cutting acquisitions, hoping that other libraries have the critical materials that they don't have, or they will work strategically in their environment to assure that those materials will be available in a timely manner.

Depending on other libraries sounds like a great way to save money--shouldn't collaborative collections management result in reduced collections budgets?

As indicated above, most collections budgets have been seriously reduced through chronic steep price increases. Though collaborative collections management can enable a library to reallocate its remaining resources to more urgent areas, it is not usefully viewed as a money-saving strategy. It is better to view collaborative collections management as a means for expanding the pool of library resources available to users.

As a library staff member, I am concerned that collaborative collections management will simply mean more work: I don't have enough time as it is to get everything done.

Collaborative collections management is a different way of working and it is likely to take some time at first as libraries become used to the differences. It need not, however, take enormous amounts of time if planned wisely. As with any planning, you need to choose what to focus on. Sometimes, for example, we assume that collaborative collections management requires lengthy and elaborate collection assessments; however, it is possible to develop quite valuable and broadly beneficial collaborative projects without doing assessments if we all agree that there is a problem to be solved.

How can I trust another library to make selections for us?

Trust is indeed an important component of some collaborative collections management projects. Again, trust is enhanced by careful planning. Collaboratively developed written agreements, regular communication, evaluation and feedback--all of these can strengthen the chances of success. At the same time, there are fairly straightforward projects in which risk can be minimized--for example, when libraries share responsibility for the titles on a list of journals.

In a word, what's in it for us?

Many libraries that have engaged in collaborative collections management have seen it as a means of making local collections decisions, confident that there is a safety net in place. It has been a strategy for providing better, faster service for their users. They have been able to reallocate resources to areas of the collections program where they are more urgently needed. Many library staff have reported strong developmental benefits from working with staff in other libraries on collaborative projects.

Collaborative collections management still looks like a radical change, and radical change takes a long time.

In many ways, collaborative collections management is a profound change. It took libraries centuries to develop a culture of self-sufficiency, so it is likely to take a bit of time for the interdependence implicit in collaborative collections management to become a way of life. Collaborative collections management requires both local and "consortial" thinking, and it calls on different skills, ways of thinking, and modes of behavior. Fortunately, Illinois has developed a solid technical infrastructure, and relationships among consortial libraries are strong. With good will and careful planning, collaborative collections management should succeed in enriching the resources available to library users.