Subject: OCLC News
After seeing the RLG release on its new organizational structure, the members of the Conservation Distribution List might be interested in seeing OCLC's release about the cessation of RLG-OCLC talks. See attached document. Thanks. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL: Phil Schieber (614) 764-6144 OCLC ISSUES STATEMENT ON CESSATION OF RLG-OCLC TALKS DUBLIN, Ohio, June 28, 1991--Dr. K. Wayne Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer, OCLC Online Computer Library Center, has issued the following statement in regard to the cessation of discussions between OCLC and the Research Libraries Group (RLG). The member libraries of RLG have informed OCLC of their decision to terminate any further discussions with OCLC concerning a proposed agreement for the transfer on a group basis of their cataloging and other technical processing activities from the RLIN System to the OCLC System. I, personally, am disappointed at this outcome. OCLC had worked very hard over the past two years to open a dialogue with RLG and over the past six months to devise a reasonable and fair proposal to eliminate one of the great schisms in the research library community and to reduce the senseless duplication of effort between OCLC and RLG. The library community is well aware of my views regarding the use of scarce resources by public and not-for-profit organizations. I have said repeatedly that OCLC cannot do everything well, and neither can RLG or LC or WLN or others. If each of us concentrated on what we can do best--if we applied the economic theory of comparative advantage--the real winner would be the American library community. In our proposed agreement, OCLC attempted to apply this principle to reduce some of the barriers to cooperation within the research library community. In brief, we attempted to consolidate most of the technical processing activities of RLG member libraries into the OCLC System so that substantial benefits would result both for RLG libraries and OCLC libraries through database enrichment and economies of scale. We also attempted to provide funding for continuing important RLG programmatic activities that are of interest to libraries. Finally, we agreed to an intersystem link between the two organizations to be completed as quickly as possible. Permit me to elaborate on three aspects of the proposed agreement that was rejected by the RLG member libraries. A Negotiated Agreement. What the RLG member libraries unilaterally rejected was an RLG-OCLC negotiated agreement, not an OCLC proposal. This agreement had been negotiated in good faith and in great detail over a six-month period by a top-level team of negotiators from both organizations. The Proposed Link. OCLC proposed to link RLIN users to the OCLC database via its EPIC service. This would be done right away. RLG also wanted OCLC users to be able to access RLIN directly. Such a seamless link would require a significant development effort. Nevertheless, OCLC agreed to implement the seamless link as soon as possible and within no more than 36 months. OCLC's intent was clearly to complete this link with all deliberate speed, but within the unavoidable context of also implementing a new, $70-million telecommunications network and a new, $30-million Online System, which are now 70 percent and 40 percent installed, respectively. The Proposed Transfer of Technical Processing. OCLC discussed with the group of research libraries that are the principal users of the RLIN system ways to transfer their technical processing and resource sharing activities to the OCLC System. OCLC encouraged these libraries to join OCLC as full cataloging members and to do so through its regional network affiliates. In the course of these negotiations, the RLG libraries asked OCLC to agree to make payments for a limited time period to support certain RLG programmatic activities of interest to libraries. OCLC agreed to make such payments provided there occurred an en masse transfer of technical processing to the OCLC System. The influx of such a group of large-volume cataloging institutions would enhance the economies of scale of the OCLC System and make it even more cost-effective for all members. It was also well within the capacity and capabilities of OCLC and its regional network affiliates to handle the migration of RLIN users to OCLC expeditiously. During the course of the negotiations, it became clear that RLG libraries were often seeking preferential arrangements that could not be supported by OCLC management or the regional networks or the OCLC membership. Such arrangements were not included in the proposed agreement. I was prepared to recommend the agreement to the OCLC Board of Trustees because I believed that it met the test of fairness to the member libraries of both OCLC and RLG, that it would withstand public and legal scrutiny, and that it would help the entire library community at a time when resources are more scarce than ever. The member libraries of RLG, however, for whatever reasons, have unilaterally decided otherwise. We must respect that decision, although with regret. Clearly, the reasons cited for the agreement's rejection by RLG representatives in their press release of June 24 were items subject to further negotiations. But, as Jim Michalko put it in his letter to me transmitting the RLG decision: "Now we can take this dream off our agenda." That is truly regrettable and certainly not what OCLC intends to do. While we have not succeeded in reaching an agreement with the RLG libraries on a group basis, we will, nevertheless, continue to work with them individually toward the goals of broadening OCLC's membership, improving library service to the scholarly community, and doing what is best for the library community as a whole. OCLC is a nonprofit computer library service and research organization whose computer network and products link more than 11,000 libraries in 41 countries and territories. Marifay Makssour, Editorial Assistant Internet: mfm [at] rsch__oclc__org Online Computer Library Center Public Relations 6565 Frantz Rd., Dublin, OH 43017 Phone: (614) 764-6145 *** Conservation DistList Instance 5:8 Distributed: Sunday, July 7, 1991 Message Id: cdl-5-8-003 ***Received on Tuesday, 2 July, 1991