The Influencing Factors on Decision to Reclassify Medical Libraries

Document Type : Research َ Article

Authors

1 Assistant Prof., Faculty of Management, University of Tehran

2 Ph.D. Student of Information Science & Knowledge Study, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate influencing factors on decision to reclassify resources in libraries of Tehran, Iran and Shahid Beheshti universalities of medical sciences.
Methodology: Using desk research, the determining factors for decision on reclassification were obtained and then library managers were surveyed using a selfdesigned questionnaire.
Results: “Executive facilities” and “perceptual factors (realizing the necessity to change), are the most determining factors to convince library managers for reclassification. Also, there are other influencing factors such as budget and continuance of library services, manager support, library collection integrity, unproper current classification and automating the change process. The less influencing factors on managers’ decisions are providing enough information and data to set purposive and proper plan for reclassification, better browsing in new classification system and ease
of user training and adaptation. 
Conclusion: Medical Libraries should employ a realistic view to evaluate factors influencing reclassification. There is no single predetermined model to prove reclassification will cause remarkable improvement.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

جوشنده، مهتاب (1372). بررسی مشکلات تغییر نظام رده‌بندی کتابخانه‌های علوم پزشکی کشور از دیگر رده‌ها به نظام رده‌بندی NLM و پیشنهاد الگوی مناسب. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی ایران، تهران.
Bright, A., Collins, S., Dujmic, L., Heath, K., Hurlbert, T., & Novak, D. (2010). Minding our P's and Q's, An adventure in reclassification. Technical Services Quarterly, 28 (1), 41-54.
Capstone, T. (2014). Literature Review: the decision to reclassify. Retrieved 30 March 2016, from https://emporia.digication.com/trudy_jorgensenprice_capstone/The_Decision_to_Reclassify2
Fister, B. (2009). The dewey dilemma. Library Journal, 134 (16), 22-25.
Gerhard, N. (1968). Problems of reclassification, academic libraries. New York: R.R. Bowker.
Gilchrist, A. (2002). From aristotle to the ‘semantic web’. Library Association Record, 104 (1), 40–42.
Hopkins, S. (2007). Decimating Dewey, introducing a bookshop arrangement for shelving the nonfiction collection. APLIS, 20 (1), 8-13.
Kumbhar, R. (2012). Library classification trends in the 21st Century. Cambridge: Chandos Publishing.
Liu, M., Kwok, L., & Chan, K. (2012). Why Change to the chinese classification scheme? a aase Study in an academic library. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50 (8) ,852–868.
Massonneau, S. (1990). Reclassification and barcoding, a unique opportunity. Collection Management, 13 (1/2),15-37.
Shorten, J., Seikel, M., & Ahrberg, J. (2005). Why do you still use dewey? academic libraries that continue with dewey decimal classification. Library Resources and Technical Services, 49 (2), 123–136.
Steele, T., & Foote, J. (2011). Reclassification in academic research libraries, Is it still relevant in an e-book world?. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 49 (1), 14-32.
Stachokas, G. (2012). A new classification system for free electronic resources. Serials Review, 38 (1), 12- 16.
Taylor, C. (1965). Reclassification: a case for LC in the academic library?. PNLA Quarterly, 29 (4), 244–246.
Tim, W. (2009). LCC from UDC, managing the conversion. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 33 (2-3), 73–79.
Tsunade, K. (2009). Changing classification systems. Pharmaceutical library Bulletin, 54 (1), 29- 46.
Pau, P., & Sidorko, P. (2006). From lai’s to LC, an account of experience on HKU libraries’ reclassification exercises. Proceedings of the 7th Annual Hong Kong Innovative Users Group Meeting, December, 11-12. Hong Kong: China.
Weaver , M., & Stanning, M. (2007). Reclassification project at st martin's college, a case study. Library Review, 56 (1), 25- 39.
Winke, R. (2004). The contracting world of cutter’s expansive classification. Library Resources Technical Services, 48 (2), 66- 83.
Womack, K. (2008). Conformity for conformity's sake? The choice of a classification system and a subject heading system in academic health sciences libraries. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 42 (1), 93-115.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Librarianship and Information Organization Studies
Volume 28, Issue 2 - Serial Number 110
September 2017
Pages 45-59

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 10 June 2016
  • Revise Date: 15 September 2016
  • Accept Date: 19 September 2016

Share

How to cite

Statistics