Skip to Search

 
diagonal spacer

Report of the Tattle-taping Work Group

Participants: Jack Fisher, Laydene Manning, Margaret Seals, Doug Smith (chair)

Charge: To assess the OPS, space, and workflow changes required to centralize the tattle-taping operation in the Copy Cataloging Unit. Recommend most efficient placement of tattle-tape operation and any associated shift of OPS support.

The recommendations in this report were shaped by some general considerations that informed what we thought feasible within the department.

  1. The use of flags indicating that material is untargeted should be avoided if at all possible. Targeted and untargeted material should be kept physically separated.


  2. Due to the nature of processing work (frequent need to move from place to place, transport of large quantities of material, etc.) it would be best if the processing students remained in a separate area and were not integrated physically with staff or student searchers.


  3. The flow of material from Acquisitions will be greater for any given time period. Thus the biggest impact overall in terms of shelving space will be in CBS, specifically in Copy Cataloging. The impact in Processing is a function primarily of the need to keep the material separated; although some extra space will be required for the six weeks of the year when students are on various breaks from school. Considerably more shelving will be required in the CBS area accompanied by some reorganization of where material is located in the unit.


  4. An increase in OPS hours will be needed in both Processing and for searching. The exact numbered of additional hours needed is difficult to estimate but 10 additional hours a week should be sufficient.

Recommendations

  1. The layout of the Processing area would remain the same, i.e. no extra shelving would be placed in the area, label creation and placement would continue to be done there, etc.


  2. Part of the reference area would be used for untargeted material. The shelves currently used for Approval material would be used for untargeted material as well as an additional free-standing bookcase placed in front of the built-in Approval shelving.


  3. The area for Approval material would be moved to three of the four sections of wall shelving located adjacent to the empty cubicle in the NEFLIN/Baldwin pod. This shelving is currently used for Foreign Approvals and Quick/Quick material (DLC copy w/o series) to be cataloged by Copy Cataloging. A PC would be set up in the cubicle for the use of the CMs.


  4. Two additional free-standing bookcases would be added to the existing Foreign Approval bookcases to compensate for the loss of shelving for FAs resulting from #3.


  5. Recommendation 3 also displaces the Quick/Quick material currently housed next to the NEFLIN/Baldwin pod. That material would be shifted to two sections of shelving currently used by the student supervisor. The loading and unloading of books from the shelves is likely to be less problematic for Patsy and Doug.


  6. The two sections of wall shelving freed up by Nancy will be used as additional space for Firm Orders originating in Acquisitions. Doug has determined that the extra shelving space freed up by Nancy and himself (four wall sections) with the addition of two more free-standing bookcases should, under “average” workflow conditions, provide the extra linear feet needed.


  7. The new tattle-taping machine has the potential to be noisy. The conference room should be considered as a possible site for operating the machine. It has the advantage of shelving and of course isolation. We are not convinced that targeting material in the conference room would be compatible with its other important departmental uses however.


  8. If the use of the third floor conference room for targeting is infeasible, the only other space available is the current Processing Area. The noise may prove problematic. Until we have some direct experience with the machine, it will be difficult to make a definitive recommendation. Short of a sound proof physical barrier placed between Processing and the rest of Room 300, it is difficult to imagine a way of controlling the noise should it prove a problem.

  9. Overflow shelving should be designated in CBS for periods when there is an unusually large volume of material or when students workers are not present. Shelving that is currently underutilized within the different units of CBS could be used for this purpose. Examples would be the wall shelving behind Tim Hartigan and the partial section of shelving, not used for Approval material in the empty cubicle in the NEFLIN/Baldwin pod. There should be agreement from all unit heads that the shelving is to be used for CBS overflow. Signs could identify the shelving as being designated for short-term use.


  10. An additional ten hours per week should be added to the OPS budget for Processing. To shorten the time material is on the shelf in CBS, an additional 10 hours of OPS time should be added for searching.

Doug SmithMay 23, 2002

 

University of Florida Home Page