It is strictly a market-driven model in which pricing is driven by demand and local costs of delivering materials. The drive for internal efficiency exemplified in this model is necessary, but it is not a sufficient basis on which to accomplish true resource sharing. Fully exploiting the technology of document delivery to limit unnecessary costs is essential in today's environment. However, libraries that adopt this model are less likely to be interested in using resource sharing as a primary strategy for their own campus constituencies. They seem to be defining themselves as nearly self-sufficient and anticipating that any material they might lack would be acquired by them in a market economy similar to the one they are supporting for potential borrowers.
Resource sharing is a primary service strategy.
Research libraries have not employed traditional ILL as a primary service strategy to provide materials to their constituencies. ILL has been a poorly treated stepchild, without adequate staff, space, equipment, or budget. As resource sharing moves into the spotlight and scholarly materials are provided from remote sites as efficiently as they could be from local branch libraries, we are bound to see the ILL function attract more and higher-level staff, use sophisticated technology to deliver materials to other libraries, acquire physical space that acknowledges its role as a service to many readers, and receive a sizeable discretionary budget that can be used with either commercial suppliers or trading partners. Some US libraries are even now investing in partnerships with each other to significantly extend the utility of their collections beyond constituencies affiliated with any single institution. They are intent on leveraging the group's investment in collections and readers' services as well as enhancing resource sharing.