June 10, 2009

Bruce Pomerantz, MN

At the December meeting, I propose that we consider an IMLS/PLSC jointprojecttocreate national returnoninvestment calculations using the data we provide.

Wealsoneed toconsidercreatingsubsets of regional returns, given the differences in cost of living around the country.  

This would not be a new data element butwhat should become a routine annualuse–and subsequent promotion--of the data.

SDC Comments

Alka Bhatnagar, NJ

Yes, I would love it! There is so much interest in ROI now that this will be very useful. The data already exists, all we need are the relevant economic and financial indicators/factors for a meaningful ROI.

Best,

Susan Mark, WY

My concern is that the field of ROI is not standardized enough, nor are individual communities standardized enough to create a meaningful number. If we're just doing a basic library value calculator, that's not really a good ROI. It's a good PR tool, but it's not what I would consider a number that would stand up to scrutiny.

Even things as basic as what the value is of a book circulation are more complex than they seem. For a book, what value is used? The average cost of a hardback? But with so many discount online sellers, it's rare that the average consumer pays the retail cost. The cost of the book to the library? This is going to vary widely (our libraries generally get 40% discount, but not all do), and this is not the value of the item to the consumer. Plus, if a consumer buys the book, they can resell it, so do we factor in that? In looking through ROI models, I've seen recommendations for book circ as low as 20-25% of book cost. Quite frankly, when I plugged in some of these more defensible numbers, I got negative ROI for some of my libraries. Yet, I know these are the same communities where the library is most important.

Books at least have some retail value. What about programs? Use of the library's computers? Meeting room uses? And the one that really strikes chills down my spine: the value of retrieving an article in our licensed databases. (ACK!) A lot of the library value calculators I've seen have no justification for the numbers they used on those types of things beyond saying they are "estimated."

Colorado did ROI studies on specific library systems, and came up with figures range from $4.28 to $31 return for each dollar invested. They surveyed patrons on such questions as how much they would have had to pay for the information elsewhere. At a national level, I suspect we won't be able to do anything beyond a calculator, and calculators really don't show the value of small-town libraries. Small-town libraries are cost-intensive, but as some of the Colorado case studies showed, the library may be even more important there.

So, if we want to put up a national library value calculator of some sort as a "Yay! Go! Rah! TEAM!" PR tool, so be it. Let's just be aware of its limits. I have my doubts that we'll get any meaningful numbers out of it.

Edie Huffman, IN

I think you're right on the mark….

Bruce Pomerantz, MN

Toot toot toot. (That's me blowing my horn.)

That's exactly the purpose of this proposal--and the best time to introduce the PR tool would be during National Library Week.

Thomas Ladd, NH

I would be concerned for the possibility that a national calculator with different criteria might wind up contradicting the results of local and state level calculators. This could create negative PR.

Just a concern……