The Patron-Driven Library: A Practical Guide for Managing Collections and Services in the Digital Age

chatbots.

Introduction: patron centered libraries

Librarians are responsible for preserving knowledge. Others will take credit for inventing machines, building bridges or curing diseases, but it is the responsibility of librarians to be the keeper of the facts behind those achievements so that others can repeat the successes or avoid the failures.

This is the important mission that brought many into the library profession, and it is a singular purpose that will help librarians stay afloat while others drown in the bits of information flooding into homes, businesses and schools off the World Wide Web. It is the responsibility of librarians to assist people by connecting them to the right information, when they need it, and in a form they can use. In the past, librarians advocated for increased access to information technology as a means by which to expand services, improve productivity and reduce costs. No one could have predicted the sea change that occurred with the web, or how libraries would be struggling to remain relevant. In spite of these challenges, librarians can overcome the barriers facing the profession today, and technology can play a key role.

Any invention adds an element of the unknown and is a catalyst for change. The more technology is incorporated into life, the more it accelerates change. Technology is now changing at a faster pace than generational turnover, which is stretching the comfort level of individuals. In the past, when new technology was introduced, workers retooled their skills. Now, technology is being introduced at a rate that requires re-education, or that even causes workers to change careers. The current generation is using technology in ways that could not have been imagined by their grandparents. Young people are more disconnected from nature (Louv, 2008: 390), and at the same time are moving away from traditional social customs.

It is no wonder that librarians are struggling to serve the multi-generational needs of users. This book is intended as a guide for librarians to develop a new relationship with technology that preserves the core mission of libraries while responding to the needs of a new generation of library clients. At stake is the future health of libraries. Will the next generation of librarians inherit museums or libraries?

The following chapters will look at the challenges facing today’s libraries and will summarize current research and experiments reported in library literature. Building on these themes, practical advice is offered on management, collections and services that will produce an organization that emphasizes the patron while preserving the ideals of the profession. This is a new age, when the success of a library will not be judged by the size of the collection, but by the quality of the librarians and services.

Part I

Libraries and library users changing with the times

1

From the White House conferences and the golden age of libraries to challenges forlibraries in the age of digital information

Abstract:

Librarians were excited about the two White House conferences in the late twentieth century. The increases in library funding from the conferences have slowed as the economy has declined, while the improvements to connectivity brought by the growth of the Internet had a dramatic and positive impact on libraries. Publishers and librarians are using information technology to deliver information in new formats, and both are struggling to create pricing models that will maintain the health of each sector.

Key words

big deal

e-books

e-readers

High Performance Computing and Communication Act

Library Services and Technology Act

recession

serial pricing

White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services (WHCLIS)

budgets

digital divide

Lessons from the White House conferences on libraries and information services

The late twentieth century may well be seen as the golden age for American libraries. Two White House Conferences on Libraries and Information Services (WHCLIS) brought national attention to the needs of libraries. The first was held in 1979, with additional momentum for library support added by the second conference in 1991. The preparation, discussions and ideas generated from the sessions brought excitement and hope, which energized librarians to engage with the issues of the time.

Pre-conferences for the first White House conference were held between 1977 and 1979 to gather input, define issues and vote on resolutions and recommendations. The first conference sought to improve information access through interlibrary cooperation and telecommunications, to advance public library services, to create leadership development opportunities, and to expand services for Native Americans. In addition to expanding services to under-represented groups, the conference highlighted the need to improve literacy.

In preparation for the second conference, pre-conferences were again held around the county to gather input from over 100,000 citizens and librarians. These pre-conferences focused on three areas – literacy, productivity and democracy – and resulted in a call for a national campaign for lifelong learning. The second conference also paid special attention to the development of the National Information Infrastructure (NII), which was defined in the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991.

The key recommendations from this Act for network infrastructure with implications for libraries included free access to information, assurances for privacy and copyright (Walsh, 1994: 3). Librarians looked forward to improved network capabilities that would bring libraries closer together and provide library patrons with immediate access to information.

Libraries did benefit from the high-speed networks built to support defense, research and business interests. The genius of the NII was in building an infrastructure of organizations, businesses and people who are not so much concerned with the technology as they are in being connected on an affordable basis and a fast-rising number of new businesses and services designed to add value to that connectivity (ibid.: 18). The NII succeeded far beyond expectations. The expansion of network infrastructure combined with technological advances in computing power and price and size reductions in computers during the 1990s, made computing more economical and practical for commerce, libraries, research and, most importantly, home use.

It is hard to recall the world of 1991 when computers were an extravagance and librarians thought of the digital divide in terms of those who had computers and those who didn’t. Librarians feared that children would be deprived of the educational benefit of digital information because their libraries and schools lacked basic infrastructure. The Library Services and Technology Act passed in 1976 was revised to focus on school libraries, and provided funding for literacy.

In the years since the White House conferences, library technologies have changed dramatically. Holdings were computerized and made available through integrated library systems (ILSs), direct patron searching replaced mediated searching by librarians and libraries offered public access terminals for general use. Increasing portions of library budgets were diverted to support new technology, and managers looked for ways to cut staffing expenditures because of the efficiencies brought about by technology. This was occurring at the same time as efforts were underway to connect libraries, schools and medical facilities via the NII infrastructure.

Today, Internet connectivity is as important to families as television, and open wireless networks are available in coffee shops and libraries around the world. When librarians speak about the digital divide today they mean the difference between those who have embraced technology and those who are uncomfortable with computers. Although the world today is very different from the world experienced by the participants of the White House conferences, there are messages from the conferences that are still valuable. In particular, the conference participants agreed that librarians should never take patronage for granted. In the years since the conferences many librarians have forgotten that message, but library promotion is more important now because information is everywhere on the web – libraries have competition.

It also seems that the US government has forgotten about libraries. In an article that appeared in the New York Times on 30 May 2012, The new divide is such a cause of concern for the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] that it is considering a proposal to spend $200 million to create a digital literacy corps. This group of hundreds, even thousands, of trainers would fan out to schools and libraries to teach productive uses of computers for parents, students and job seekers(Richtel, 2012). Librarians are trained and ready to supply these services so why does the FCC believe a new program is needed? This is an example of a growing disconnect between government and libraries as evidenced by reductions and eliminations of school and public libraries. Librarians need to address this trend through a combination of activism and proactive services which make the case for libraries through measurable benefits.

Rising costs and reduced budgets

Libraries experienced success with information technology that included sharing cataloging and resources, and improving overall efficiencies in operation, but those successes have not been rewarded with sustained budget increases. The federal government has an inconsistent approach to supporting library efforts to improve access to the web. The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s Broadband Initiatives provides grants for projects that improve broadband services, including in under-served areas; however, the FCC, which released the National Broadband Plan, is proposing to finance the Connect America Fund by using the E-Rate Fund. The E-Rate Fund has been used historically to support Internet connectivity to libraries and schools (Jaeger et al., 2012) and reductions will impact the ability of libraries to provide network connectivity for patrons.

Public libraries are a good barometer of the health of the profession in general, and the news has not been good. Funding at the national level from the Library Services and Technology Act has been declining since 2002. Likewise, state support for library programs is falling as the recession, which started in 2007, continues to impact tax receipts. Libraries have entered a gilded age, where declining budgets are challenging academic, public, school and special libraries.

Once-supportive legislators look for programs to cut, leaving cash-strapped communities to make up the difference. In turn, mayors are asking public libraries to cut back on library hours, staff or library services as budget saving measures. Librarians faced with flat budgets but increasing expenses for materials and staff, or, worse, faced with budget reductions, have been forced to prioritize services and material budgets.

A 2009 survey conducted by June Power through the CIRCPLUS discussion list highlights some of the ways in which libraries were being impacted. These included layoffs, reduced funding for programs and reductions in the number of programs, reductions in the numbers of student workers, positions that were not replaced, and cuts to statewide consortiums (Power, 2009). Reductions in staffing were common in all types of libraries in the early days of the recession, with a preference for reduction through attrition.

The American Library Association (ALA), reporting on the state of public libraries in the US, noted that:

data from the 2010–2011 Study present libraries grappling with a new normal of flat or decreased funding, paired with increased demand for public library technology resources. The result is a mix of the grim austerity, reflected in decreased operating hours and closed library outlets, in contrast with the robust delivery of technology resources that support workforce development, e-government services, and skills training for the competitive global marketplace.

(American Library Association (ALA) Office for Research & Statistics and the Information Policy Access Center at the University of Maryland, 2011: 7–10)

The Future of Libraries report published in CQ Researcher in 2011 confirms the public library cuts, and reports similar circumstances for school libraries, Libraries in urban school districts are facing numerous difficulties, ranging from staffing cuts to reduced operating hours. Less than 40 percent have at least one full-time librarian and 35 percent report decreased staffing levels over the past three years (Mantel, 2011: 628).

Academic libraries are also suffering from a reduction in tax support and double-digit percentage reductions in endowment earnings because of declining stock value. Tuition increases to offset declining revenues are unpopular with students and parents. University administrators are becoming wary of raising tuition beyond the modest cost-of-living increases, while libraries struggle with increases on materials that exceed inflationary rates for other commodities. Academic libraries have reduced staffing and other operating costs and have turned to the materials budgets: Among the strategies employed, journal cancellation was most common and used by 54%, followed closely by 41% reducing monograph purchases, and 30% eliminating databases. Since around the year 2000, libraries have moved from purchasing print and e-versions to e-only; and 21% used the strategy this year when it could reduce serial subscription cost (Lowry, 2011: 45).

Rising prices for books and journals are straining all types of library budgets. As reported by Library Journal in 2011, serials prices are increasing without corresponding increases in budgets:

During the recession there was a reduction in cost for most commodities and goods, with the Customer Price Index (CPI) dropping in 2009 and only increasing 1.6 percent in 2010. During that same period, serials prices continued to rise at well above the CPI (four to five percent), and, against the backdrop of decreased federal funding for libraries, price increases are very hard to sustain.

(Bosch et al., 2011: 3)

This comes as no surprise to librarians who are making difficult choices to cancel print subscriptions. In a 2010 survey reported by EBSCO, a subscription management company, libraries are absorbing reductions by reducing staff and renegotiating license agreements (Collins, 2012). Additional tactics include dropping print in favor of electronic journals (86 percent), and looking for ways to save money by reducing or eliminating the duplication that comes with package plans (75 percent) (ibid.).

Book prices are increasing but not at the same rate as serials. Publisher income from book sales is led by the growth in e-book sales: The growth in eBook trade publishing has grown from .06% in 2008 to 6.4% in 2010 (Tonkery, 2011: 36). The percentage of e-book sales for publishers is increasing consistently and is expected to continue to grow in light of the rising popularity and variety of reading devices.

Publishers have also impacted on library budgets through mergers and publisher acquisitions. Many librarians were concerned about the consolidation of publishers, and, in 2003, the American Association of Law Libraries, the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical Library Association, the Special Library Association and SPARC combined to form the Information Access Alliance, whose purpose was to tackle perceived insupportable increases in prices. In 2003, the Alliance issued a report, Publisher Mergers: A Consumer-based Approach to Antitrust Analysis, which highlighted the concerns librarians have about the consolidation of the publishing industry (Susman et al., 2003: 33). In spite of Alliance efforts, the consolidation of publishers continues, and some distributors are now entering the market as evidenced by EBSCO’s acquisition of NetLibrary eBooks and H.W. Wilson. In addition to publishers swallowing other publishers, there were also instances of a publisher selling a single journal to another publisher, which further consolidates subject titles with particular publishers.

Figure 1.1 illustrates a map of three publishers’ acquisitions, and the companies that they absorbed or transferred between them. The publishers in circles were subsumed by the purchasing company they are linked to, which in turn was acquired by or merged with the publisher in the tinted box. The figure illustrates the trend towards publisher consolidations, a particular theme for the scientific and legal areas: Elsevier is one of many journal publishers that has digitized its full backfile, with the number of articles on ScienceDirect passing 9.5 million – about 25% of the total scientific, technological, and medical (STM) literature (Hunter and Bruning, 2010: 148).

Figure 1.1 Reed Elsevier map depicting publisher acquisitions

Publishers defend these acquisitions as efficiency measures that can reduce production costs, which in turn will result in lower costs to libraries. However, this argument is difficult to defend given the increases in pricing reported by libraries. The Association of Research Libraries (ARL), reporting on information collected from member libraries over the period 1986 through 2009, demonstrated that serial costs grew 381 percent during that period (Kyrillidou and Morris, 2011: 11). These unsustainable increases are causing libraries to rethink their purchasing decisions and collection policies.

One group of publishers that is suffering under budget reductions is university presses. University presses are among the smallest publishers and have a tradition of producing scholarly publications which generally do not have mass appeal. The principal customers for university presses are libraries, and sales from 2005–9 have been flat (Greco et al., 2007: 10). The current economic situation has added to this pressure and as the economic situation improves it is unlikely that university presses will be able to bounce back as well as the more diversified commercial publishers with which they