









































Conversation Groups  177

Top Concerns of Technical  
Services Staff
Summary notes submitted by Christa Strickler, Associate Professor of Library 
Science, Wheaton College 
Moderated by Richard Lammert, Technical Services and Systems Librarian, 
Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne

ABSTR AC T The annual conversation group sponsored by the Techni-
cal Services Interest Group provides an opportunity for library work-
ers in technical services areas—or in any area of library work—an 
opportunity to discuss anything that anyone considers a top concern 
for technical services staff. Participation by persons other than those 
in technical services area is encouraged, since the work in technical 
services ultimately influences work in all other areas of the library.

Twenty-one people logged into the session of the annual “Top 
Concerns of Technical Services Staff” held on June 23, 2021. In the 
open discussion, the attendees discussed the following topics:

TOPIC: EBSCO E-BOOK RECORDS
The records provided with consortial purchases of e-books from 
EBSCO only contain BISAC subject headings. Even though the 
record contains an OCLC number linking to a record with Library of 
Congress Subject Headings, those more-detailed access points are not 
included in the EBSCO record. Proposed solutions included inquiring 
with EBSCO about the subject heading removal, manually importing 
the records using the OCLC numbers provided in the EBSCO records, 
or using MarcEdit to extract the OCLC numbers, do a batch search in 
OCLC Connexion, and bulk import the records.

TOPIC: STUDENT WORKER TRAINING
What methods do different libraries use for training student work-
ers? Is one-on-one training the norm, or do Atla members also use 
tools such as Trello or learning management systems? Some attend-
ees referred to Jude Morrissey’s presentation on “Making Use of 
Your LMS for Student Staff Training & Support” (a Listen-and-Learn 
session earlier in this conference) as providing good ideas for using 

https://sched.co/iu0O
https://sched.co/iu0O


178  AT L A 202 1 PROCEEDINGS

options such as quizzes within the LMS. Trello works for some but 
not others, with its effectiveness partly depending on the complexity 
and flexibility of the setup (simpler is better for some) and the nature 
of the work, with the predictability of cataloging tasks being better 
suited to Trello than the more volatile nature of circulation work.

TOPIC: ADVOCATING FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES WORK
It can be challenging to advocate for technical services work when 
one also has public services duties to manage. One suggestion is to 
explain how technical services work impacts the public services roles, 
such as searching the catalog. One can show how what one is doing 
in technical services adds values to the records. Another suggestion 
is to advocate for policies that show value for technical services work, 
such as ensuring that technical services student workers are not 
borrowed for public services work. It also helps to have conversa-
tions with one’s supervisor about priorities so that there is agreement 
on whether timeliness, quality, or quantity of work is the most valued, 
since one can only manage two of the three at a time. Others also 
suggested tracking which tasks are done or the time spent on tasks 
so that one can demonstrate which activities will not be completed 
if one has to spend more time on public services work. Additionally, 
cataloging roles often include a lot of collaboration through programs 
such as NACO, CONSER, BIBCO, and OCLC shared cataloging. These 
shared programs are so embedded in our work that administra-
tors may expect that if we reduce cataloging time to focus on public 
services tasks, the slack will simply be taken up by other institutions.

TOPIC: MIGRATING TO A NEW INTEGRATED LIBRARY SYSTEM
In a migration from Alma to OCLC’s WorldShare Management System, 
tracking which records are for electronic materials and which are 
for print is challenging. A suggestion from OCLC is to ensure that 
records for electronic materials include a $h in the 245 field to assist 
in record identification, but this does not validate in RDA records. 
For now, the solution has been to use a 590 field.

TOPIC: RECORD ENHANCEMENTS IN OCLC
When enhancing a local bibliographic record, it is sometimes not 
possible to transfer those enhancements to the master record in 
OCLC because permissions do not allow it. It was noted that OCLC is 
expanding the fields that may be updated in a PCC record.


