lecture presented by Jocelyn T. Balangue at the 4th Marina G. Dayrit Lecture Series with the theme "Collection Assessment for Academic Libraries: Case Studies" on September 16, 2016, held at SMX Convention Center, Mall of Asia on the occasion of the 37th Manila International Book Fair

1. The 80/20 Rule :
Analysis of Factors that Contribute to Print
Book Utilization
Jocelyn T. Balangue
16 September 2016

2. Topics to be discussed
• Objectives of the Study
• Scope and Limitations
• Significance of the Study
• Methodology
• Results
• Conclusion and Recommendations

3. Objectives of the Study
• This study was conducted to examine the pattern of user’s
behavior in the utilization of the print book collection.

4. Scope and Limitations
• The study conducted was based on the print book
collections classified under Education or those classified
under class letters L to LT.
• Only the Education book collections housed at the following
libraries were covered: The Learning Commons, AGH Law
Library, Br. Benedict Learning Resource Center (BBLRC),
Science and Technology Complex (STC) College Library, and
Makati Extension Campus (MEC) Library.
• Excluded were those housed at the STC Integrated School
Libraries considering the audience level of the books housed
in these DLSU Libraries.

5. Significance of the Study
• The result of the study may serve as basis for the
improvement of the collection development process for the
Education print book collection.

6. Methodology
• The usage statistics from January 2003 up to
March 2016 of the library’s current total
print book holdings on Education Collection
were extracted from Sierra, the Libraries
integrated system.
• The data were sorted in terms of total usage
from the biggest to smallest using the Pareto
Analysis.

7. Methodology
• The Pareto principle (i.e. 80% of the usage is generated by
20% of the collection) was used as basis in shortening the
total number of entries in descending order from 9,702 to
3,481 entries for books with usage.
• The utilization ratio was then determined by dividing the
number of items in a particular subject area by the total
number of items held, then multiplied by 100.
Utilization ratio = Number of circulated items X 100
Total number of items

8. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Profile of Print Book Usage by Subject Area
LC Class Subject Areas
No. of
items
With
usage
%
W/out
usage
%
L Education (General) 295 51 0.27 244 1.30
LA History of Education 1,936 776 4.13 1,160 6.19
LB Theory and Practice of Education 12,457 6,937 36.98 5,520 29.43
LC Special Aspects of Education 3,173 1,740 9.28 1,433 7.64
LD Individual Institutions – United States 113 24 0.13 89 0.50
LE Individual Institutions – America (except U.S.) 5 2 0.01 3 0.02
LF Individual Institutions – Europe 18 3 0.02 15 0.08
LG Individual Institutions – Asia and others 748 164 0.87 584 3.11
LH College and School Magazines and Newspapers 2 0 0.00 2 0.01
LJ Student Fraternities and Societies – United States 2 1 0.00 1 0.00
LT Textbooks 9 4 0.02 5 0.03
Grand Total 18,758 9,702 51.7% 9,056 48.3%

9. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Breakdown of Print Book Usage by Class Letter
Class Subject Areas
BOOKS WITH USAGE
BOOKS WITHOUT
USAGE
No. of items % No. of items %
L Education (General) 0 0.00 244 2.69
LA History of Education 149 4.28 1160 12.81
LB Theory and Practice of Education 2,727 78.34 5520 60.95
LC Special Aspects of Education 583 16.75 1433 15.82
LD Individual Institutions – United States 8 0.23 89 0.98
LE Individual Institutions – America (except U.S.) 0 0.00 3 0.03
LF Individual Institutions – Europe 0 0.00 15 0.17
LG Individual Institutions – Asia and others 9 0.26 584 6.45
LH College and School Magazines and Newspapers 0 0.00 2 0.02
LJ Student Fraternities and Societies – United States 1 0.03 1 0.01
LT Textbooks 4 0.11 5 0.06
Grand Total 3481 100 9056 100

10. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Breakdown of Print Book by Publication Date
PUB RANGE
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
No. of Items % No. of Items %
1800-1900 0 0.00 64 0.71
1901-1910 0 0.00 112 1.24
1911-1920 1 0.03 186 2.05
1921-1930 0 0.00 310 3.42
1931-1940 1 0.03 248 2.74
1941-1950 5 0.14 269 2.97
1951-1960 19 0.55 554 6.12
1961-1970 85 2.44 1,423 15.71
1971-1980 155 4.45 1,556 17.18
1981-1990 300 8.62 1,282 14.16
1991-2000 1,287 36.97 1,249 13.79
2001-2010 1,410 40.51 1,201 13.26
2011-2015 216 6.21 465 5.13
UND 2 0.06 137 1.51
Grand Total 3,481 100.00 9,056 100.00

11. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Breakdown of Print Book by Authors
Authorship Pattern
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
No. of Items % No. of Items %
Books with 1 author 1,439 41.4 3,991 44.1
Books with 2 or more
author 1,244 35.7 1,819 20.0
Books with corporate
author 39 1.1 794 8.8
Compilations (no
author) 759 21.8 2,452 27.1
Total 3,481 100 9,056 100

12. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Distribution of Print Book by Subject Headings
Subject Headings
Pattern
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
No. of Items % No. of Items %
Books w/o subject 3 0.09 106 1.17
Books with 1 subject 854 24.53 3,830 42.29
Books with 2 or more
subject 2,624 75.38 5,120 56.54
Total 3,481 100.00 9,056 100.00

13. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Distribution of Print Book by Place of Publication
Place of Publication
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
No. of Items % No. of items %
U.S. 2,321 66.68 4,344 47.97
England, UK 529 15.20 590 6.52
Philippines 419 12.04 2,558 28.25
Australia/New Zealand 41 1.18 88 0.97
India 39 1.12 49 0.54
Asia 33 0.95 262 2.89
South/Central/North America 11 0.32 62 0.68
Europe 44 1.26 665 7.34
Africa 1 0.03 2 0.02
Undetermined 43 1.24 436 4.81
Total 3,481 100 9,056 100.00

14. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Breakdown of Print Book Collection by Mode of Acquisition
Class
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
Purchase Donation UND Grand Total % Purchase Donation UND Grand Total %
L 0 0 0 0 0.00 14 30 200 244 2.69
LA 55 5 89 149 4.28 191 212 757 1160 12.81
LB 1,370 61 1,296 2,727 78.34 1,131 585 3,804 5,520 60.95
LC 264 6 313 583 16.75 282 200 951 1,433 15.82
LD 0 1 7 8 0.23 11 17 61 89 0.98
LE 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 3 3 0.03
LF 0 0 0 0 0.00 3 3 9 15 0.17
LG 2 0 7 9 0.26 103 161 320 584 6.45
LH 1 0 0 1 0.03 0 2 2 0.02
LJ 0 0 4 4 0.11 1 0 0 1 0.01
LT 0 0 0 0 0.00 3 2 5 0.06
Total 1,692 73 1,716 3,481 100 1,736 1,211 6,109 9,056 100

15. LOCATION
WITH USAGE WITHOUT USAGE
No. of Items % No. of Items %
AGH 17 0.49 18 0.20
Archives 0 0.00 63 0.20
BBLRC 1,248 35.85 819 9.04
Circulation 1,690 48.55 3,634 40.13
Filipiniana 138 3.96 1696 18.73
OEC 1 0.03 7 0.08
MEC 1 0.03 57 0.63
IMS 0 0.00 6 0.03
Reference 376 10.80 551 6.08
Preservation room 0 0.00 20 0.22
Special Collection 8 0.23 1752 19.35
STC 2 0.06 431 4.76
Yuchengco 0 0.00 2 0.02
Total 3,481 100% 9056 100%
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Factors that Contribute to the Print Book Utilization
Breakdown of Print Book Collection by Location

16. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• The DLSU Libraries should not acquire any titles on subject areas that
were identified with zero usage namely: Education-General (L),
Individual Institutions – America (except U.S.) (LE); Individual
Institutions – Europe (LF), College and School Magazines and
Newspapers (LH) and Textbooks (LT).
• Priority of acquisition should concentrate fully on subject areas that
support the curricular offerings and program of the BAGCED and these
were: Theory and Practice of Education (LB) and Special Aspects of
Education (LC).
• The Collection Development Librarian should improve the selection
process to ensure that books that will be acquired will be of use to
library users.
• Lastly, the DLSU Libraries should consider weeding out non-circulating
items particularly those older books that are of no use to clients.

17. REFERENCES
• Adams, B. and Noel, B. (2008). Circulation statistics in the evaluation of collection development. Collection Building, vol.
27 (2) : pp. 71-73. Retrieved from http://www.valkyrie22.com/library/LIS%20748/Assigned%20Readings%20-
%20LIS%20748/04%20-%20Oct%205/Circulation_statistics.pdf
• Applegate, R. (2013). Practical evaluation techniques for librarians. Santa Barbara, California : Libraries Unlimited.
• Clark, M.L. (2007). Building a consortial monographic purchase plan : the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries
experience. Retrieved from:
http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/national/baltimore/papers/39.pd
f
• Dunford, R. Su, Q. Tamang, E. and Wintour, A. (2014). The Pareto principle. The Plymouth Student Scientist, vol.7 (1) :
pp.140-148. Retrieved from: http://bcur.org/journals/index.php/TPSS/article/view/408/387
• Littman, J. and Connaway, L.S. (2004). A circulation analysis of print book and e-books in an academic research library.
Library Resources & Technical Services, vol. 48 (4) : pp. 256-262. Retrieved from:
http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2004/littman-connaway-duke.pdf
• Singson, M. and Hangsing, P. (2015) Implications of 80/20 rule in electronic journal usage of UGC-Infonet Consortia.
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 41 pp. 207-219. Retrieved from:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133314002444
• _______. (2014). Reaffirming pareto 80/20 rule in Indian Academic Consortia. World Digital Libraries v.7 (1): pp. 57-70.
Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268815016_Reaffirming_Pareto_8020_rule_in_Indian_Academic_Consortia
• Trueswell, R.W. (1967). Some behavioral pattern of library users : the 80/20 rule. Wilson Library Bulletin, v.43. pp. 458-
• 461.
• Wiley, L. Chrzastowski, T.E. and Baker, S. (2011). A domestic monograph collection assessment in Illinois Academic
Libraries : What we are buying and how is it used? Retrieved from:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/02641611111187587

18. Thank you for Listening!
16 September 2016