Bound With Records

How Alma prefers to handle bound-withs, and the way they transformed those records as part of the migration, is a really knotty subject that we have spent a long time talking about. (Long story short: Alma's preferred system makes sense in some ways going forward, but doesn't work well when applied to existing records). And every institution who has migrated to Alma has had to adopt a stance towards it, either leaving it alone, modifying it, or trying to undo or replace it.

Situation in Sierra and many other catalogs

For bound-with materials, most of us are familiar with a system where multiple bib records are linked to each other through 773 or 774 fields and/or each bib is also linked to a single item record. There is frequently no bib record for the entire object itself or anything that could be considered the "parent record". The first title in the sequence of bound-together titles is merely considered the primary record. So if a ring binder, for instance, bound together five exhibition catalogs, each catalog has a bib record and they share an item record, but there is no record for the ring binder itself, and if it has a cover or spine title or other useful details, there is no place to record those except in a note field in the primary record.

In Alma

Alma doesn't allow multiple bib records to be linked to a single item. During the migration, we pre-identified all of our bound-with items. For each set of bound-with titles, Ex Libris auto-generated a new parent record, mostly blank, but with a 245 of "Host bibliographic record for boundwith item barcode [barcode number]". Then created the 774 fields from the related bib records into this new host record, and moved the item all the other titles were linked to to this new record.

What to do

In one sense, this new structure is a better conceptual model of bound with materials as the host bibliographic record essentially represents that overall bound object and provides a place to record spine title, object history or provenance and other notes, significant agents such the person who collected and assembled the titles together, or other access points. But the retrospectively created host bibliographic records are barren of information and confusing to the user. So understandably lots of libraries don't like these new host bibliographic records, but getting rid of them altogether would be lots of work so most institutions seem to adopt a modification strategy, where they suppress different bits of the bound-with network of bib and item records and make some small edits to bib or item content. Usually this can all be done by running jobs on sets.

Within NYARC, each library can determine what's best for themselves since it doesn't seem like choices in this regard will affect the other libraries (though we're not 100% certain of this, it at least concerns only a very very small portion of our catalog: titles where one library's copy is bound-with other titles while another library owns a free standing copy of that title). 

At MoMA we are taking a modification strategy consistent with multiple other institutions, but best documented I think here:

https://www.carli.illinois.edu/products-services/i-share/phys-res-man/boundwith

The basic steps (not necessarily in a particular order are:

In the host record:

• Change the existing 245 "Host bibliographic record for..." to a 246

• Add a new 245 with improved wording. 

• In each 774 field replace the "$$9 ExL" with a "$$9 unrelated"

• Suppress the host bibliographic record

In each related bib record

• Add a dummy holding and item record

• Suppress the dummy holding and item record

Further Description

So the recommended strategy is to leave the host bibliographic record in place as an acceptable (if not ideal) way to

• Preserve Ex Libris' intended functionality in Alma and Primo

• Represent the physical unified object in the back end of the catalog

• Provide a place to describe the object in the future.

Modifications are to be made only in bulk by running jobs on sets. No individual hand edits are recommended. The modifications need not be made in any order. Some might be bundled into the same job, though others may have to be done separately.

Modifying the Host Bibliographic Record

1. Change the existing 245 "Host bibliographic record for..." to a 246

Just in case it is useful for search and retrieval in Alma, and to preserve information in case mistakes are made or alterations obscure the record history.

2. Add a new 245 with improved wording. 

MoMA's preferred wording is "Multiple titles bound as single volume with item barcode [barcode number]". This can be discussed and altered in the future, but consistency is important so only one version should be implemented at any time.

3. In each 774 field replace the "$$9 ExL" with a "$$9 unrelated"

This is to improve how the holdings for bound-with materials displaty in Primo, though the improvement is relatively mindor.
Ex Libris' explanation of the function of the $$9 is described here. https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/Physical_Resource_Management/070_Configuring_Resource_Management/009Configuring_Related_Records_for_Physical_Inventory 

4. Suppress the host bibliographic record

For all auto-generated host bibliographic records, the lack of information in the host bib record proves too confusing to library users to stay visible in the catalog. Suppressing this bib record will hide it from the user without inhibiting the display of the holding and item when viewing the bib records for the constituent titles. The host record may be made visible again if the record is improved with actual description of the volume (as might be done going forward for new bound together materials, TBD). But many of our materials do not warrant that work, especially in retrospect.

Modifying the Related Bibliographic Records and Inventory

In each related bib record no actual change to the bib record is required, so it can remain untouched, but inventory should be added.

1. To each constituent bib record of a bound-with, add a holding and item record.

This is dummy placeholder inventory only and will not be visible to users. Without such inventory, this individual titles will not show up in searches on physical titles in Alma (without an item Alma doesn't know it's physical). And in Analytics, counts of physical titles or statistics based on them will likewise exclude bound-withs and thus not accurately represent the collection. Things to keep in mind:

• The holding record can have the same call number and shelving location as the real bound-with item.

• The item record does not need to have any information in it.

2. Suppress the new dummy holding record

These new holding records should all be suppressed to be hidden from the user in Primo. The attached item record will automatically also be hidden.

Below is a diagram of the host bibliographic record, its actual inventory, and the constituent bibliographic records with their dummy inventory showing which records should be suppressed and which visible.