Library regionalization offers some additional benefits to library users at both the management and policy level. When I refer to management I’m using the term broadly and including personnel selection and supervision, contract development and oversight, financial controls, marketing, and library leadership positions.
When staffs from all area agencies are brought together under a single entity the ultimate goal should be a uniformity of service delivery at a very high level. This is ultimately accomplished by establishing system wide performance standards (either negotiated in a union environment or established collegially if collective bargaining is rejected) and investing in ongoing staff development. This is easier to accomplish on paper than in practice.
Most library directors believe that they have a good staff that serves their public well. Some libraries are more dependent on part-time staff while others have a higher ratio of librarians to clerks. Everyone has a different salary and benefit structure. A substantial amount of time will have to be invested to make a staff merger work and there is little doubt that everyone won’t be totally satisfied. This does not mean it can’t be done.
From the public’s point of view one of the advantages of consolidation should be a minimization of duplication. How many library directors or other “back room” functionaries without significant public service responsibility are required to run a regional system? My answer would be fewer than we have now. The good news, and this tends to be true across the United States, is that there are an awful lot of directors, myself included, who will be looking at retirement in the none too distant future.
Some back room consolidation will simply result in better delivery or control. A marketing department that serves a broad region may need to make different choices but should not be exceptionally more expensive to operate. A business office, and I’m assuming a regional library would be a separate corporation, may well have to employ an accountant but overall should be quite lean.
The library users really benefit when policies and procedures are consistent throughout a region. Why should libraries reinvent the wheel on issues like Internet Use and Behavior Policies? I believe our customers would welcome a uniform approach to circulation periods for materials, a universal decision on the daily cost of an overdue fine, and a consistent policy on when borrowing privileges are suspended. A side benefit is that “serial abusers” of library services are easily identified in a regional environment.
Next time I hope to talk a little about potential governance of a regional system and how such an entity might be funded.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Letter to the editor
The following letter, which is jointly signed by Board President Susan Voss and myself was sent to the Des Moines Register today:
Open and honest communication has been at the heart of the Des Moines Public Library’s entire ten-year facilities improvements plan, so you can imagine our dismay at today’s editorial in the Des Moines Register regarding the community’s participation in the Franklin Avenue Library’s planned renovation.
The library is eager to meet with the Urban Design Review Board to clear up any miscommunications about the project and we are confident that City Engineering and the project’s architect will promptly address any oversight.
More than a year ago, the library began a series of five public meetings, inviting input from community members, neighborhood associations, library users, city council members, county staff and elected officials, and anyone else that was interested in the plans for improving our busiest branch. We heavily publicized these meetings through neighborhood association newsletters, posters in all of our libraries, in-house publications such as our quarterly newsletters, our bi-monthly calendar of events, news releases to the media which covered the meetings, in print, TV and radio. We featured the meetings on our web site and included full descriptions of the project. Our staff even took the time to stuff handouts in the hundreds of items on hold for our customers, to ensure that we were reaching as many people who had an interest in the project as possible.
Following each meeting, the architects carefully considered the comments they received from the public, adjusted plans, and shared their changes at subsequent meetings. Throughout the process, the library answered questions, shared information, and enjoyed a positive atmosphere in all communications between the public and the architects. There was never an attempt to hide the project and anyone that is a regular visitor of the Franklin Avenue Library would have to have walked past the proposed model to check out a book or use any of the library’s many services.
We regret any miscommunication and look forward to further input from all interested parties. Our ultimate goal is for the Franklin Avenue Library to continue to meet the needs of its users and fulfill its vital role within our community.
Open and honest communication has been at the heart of the Des Moines Public Library’s entire ten-year facilities improvements plan, so you can imagine our dismay at today’s editorial in the Des Moines Register regarding the community’s participation in the Franklin Avenue Library’s planned renovation.
The library is eager to meet with the Urban Design Review Board to clear up any miscommunications about the project and we are confident that City Engineering and the project’s architect will promptly address any oversight.
More than a year ago, the library began a series of five public meetings, inviting input from community members, neighborhood associations, library users, city council members, county staff and elected officials, and anyone else that was interested in the plans for improving our busiest branch. We heavily publicized these meetings through neighborhood association newsletters, posters in all of our libraries, in-house publications such as our quarterly newsletters, our bi-monthly calendar of events, news releases to the media which covered the meetings, in print, TV and radio. We featured the meetings on our web site and included full descriptions of the project. Our staff even took the time to stuff handouts in the hundreds of items on hold for our customers, to ensure that we were reaching as many people who had an interest in the project as possible.
Following each meeting, the architects carefully considered the comments they received from the public, adjusted plans, and shared their changes at subsequent meetings. Throughout the process, the library answered questions, shared information, and enjoyed a positive atmosphere in all communications between the public and the architects. There was never an attempt to hide the project and anyone that is a regular visitor of the Franklin Avenue Library would have to have walked past the proposed model to check out a book or use any of the library’s many services.
We regret any miscommunication and look forward to further input from all interested parties. Our ultimate goal is for the Franklin Avenue Library to continue to meet the needs of its users and fulfill its vital role within our community.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Regionalization #5
Is it viable and/or desirable to create a regional system in Central Iowa? Why would Des Moines, with its long history and recent 40 + million dollar investment in library buildings want to abandon its identity and work with suburban libraries? Why would neighboring communities want to participate in Des Moines’ ongoing financial woes? Further, experience says that each library believes that they understand and deliver service to their community at a higher level by existing as an independent entity. Despite probable objections and recognizing that customers are well served in Polk County through reciprocal borrowing, I believe end users will receive improved service through formal regionalization.
Virtually every customer survey tells librarians that the primary reason that people use libraries is to borrow materials. The deeper the collection, both in variety and number of copies, the more satisfied the user. Currently Des Moines invests approximately a million dollars a year in materials. Libraries serving substantially smaller populations have correspondingly lower budgets. However, if all budgets were merged ultimately more material would be available for all users.
No matter how robust a materials collection may be customers need to know, with an apology to Jean Paul Sartre, of an item’s existence. Within a library setting this means what is purchased has to be cataloged, processed, and linked to an integrated library system (the electronic version of the old card catalog.) Currently libraries in Polk County are responsible for their own cataloging and processing and have an electronic catalog unique to them. From both a customer and taxpayer point of view this is inefficient.
Customers want to know what is available and where it resides. Today the only way that information is available is by accessing several different catalogs. If time is money libraries need to plead guilty to wasting both for end users. Taxpayers, whether they are users or not, want to see their monies extend as far as possible. Logic says that consolidating acquisitions, cataloging and processing and marrying the process to a uniform online catalog has to improve efficiency.
There are two decisions that will need to be made to effectively consolidate collection budgets and catalogs. The first is to let all collections “float.” What this means is a borrower can check out an item from Agency A and return it to Agency B. Traditionally the item would be returned in delivery to Agency A. When items float they stay where they are returned. There are a number of permutations of floating collections, most notably new materials stay at their home agency for a specified period before they become floating items, but implementation of the concept improves overall access to more people. The second is an investment in a robust delivery service. This is an additional cost but it should be more than offset by savings.
Next time I want to briefly explore policy and management advantages of regionalization. I’ll follow that with what I believe stands in the way and make a few suggestions on how to address the issues.
Virtually every customer survey tells librarians that the primary reason that people use libraries is to borrow materials. The deeper the collection, both in variety and number of copies, the more satisfied the user. Currently Des Moines invests approximately a million dollars a year in materials. Libraries serving substantially smaller populations have correspondingly lower budgets. However, if all budgets were merged ultimately more material would be available for all users.
No matter how robust a materials collection may be customers need to know, with an apology to Jean Paul Sartre, of an item’s existence. Within a library setting this means what is purchased has to be cataloged, processed, and linked to an integrated library system (the electronic version of the old card catalog.) Currently libraries in Polk County are responsible for their own cataloging and processing and have an electronic catalog unique to them. From both a customer and taxpayer point of view this is inefficient.
Customers want to know what is available and where it resides. Today the only way that information is available is by accessing several different catalogs. If time is money libraries need to plead guilty to wasting both for end users. Taxpayers, whether they are users or not, want to see their monies extend as far as possible. Logic says that consolidating acquisitions, cataloging and processing and marrying the process to a uniform online catalog has to improve efficiency.
There are two decisions that will need to be made to effectively consolidate collection budgets and catalogs. The first is to let all collections “float.” What this means is a borrower can check out an item from Agency A and return it to Agency B. Traditionally the item would be returned in delivery to Agency A. When items float they stay where they are returned. There are a number of permutations of floating collections, most notably new materials stay at their home agency for a specified period before they become floating items, but implementation of the concept improves overall access to more people. The second is an investment in a robust delivery service. This is an additional cost but it should be more than offset by savings.
Next time I want to briefly explore policy and management advantages of regionalization. I’ll follow that with what I believe stands in the way and make a few suggestions on how to address the issues.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Regionalization #4
In my last blog I said I wanted to talk about the benefits of regionalization in my last job as C.E.O. of the Fraser Valley Regional Library (FVRL). I’ll also talk a little about issues that made regionalization a challenge.
FVRL was established in the early 1930’s to serve the sparsely populated Lower Mainland of British Columbia that lies outside the City of Vancouver. Fast forward 75 years and the Lower Mainland is the fastest growing area of Canada with all of the environmental and growth issues that surround any metro area. Currently FVRL delivers service to over 650,000 people living in 15 communities in an area of 13,000 square kilometers.
Why does regionalization work and what does it mean in this environment? What are the shortfalls of this arrangement? Why are accountants the last creative people left in Hollywood?
In FVRL , regionalization is primarily about consolidating “back room” operations and providing opportunities for local identity. The “back room” consists almost exclusively of support services. These services include marketing and printing, acquisitions, cataloging, and processing, information technology, accounting, personnel management, and library administration. All of these services are housed together in a headquarters building that is the only property owned by FVRL.
The “back room” is a cost shared by all 15 communities based on a formula that can be described as the full employment act for accountants. Basically cost is apportioned based on population, circulation, and library square footage and is far less than any community operating independently would invest. The benefits of this arrangement to library users are more than financial.
First and foremost policies are consistent throughout the region. A customer can travel from Boston Bar, to Abbotsford, to Port Coquitlam and encounter the same circulation periods for materials, identical overdue fines, rules for Internet use, and be assured that the privacy of their records receives the same care. Second, there is a single union contract for all employees throughout the system. The benefits of a master contract, as opposed to 15 individual ones, are myriad. Third, a uniform online catalog makes information about library holdings more readily accessible. Fourth, pooling funds for acquisitions allows more titles and copies to be acquired and shared. Fifth, materials produced by the system have a uniform and professional appearance. These are the benefits that come quickly to mind.
Each community owns its building and is responsible for its maintenance. Communities also decide on the program they want to present their public. If a community wants to be open 72 hours a week and have a vigorous Children’s Services presence they would contract with FVRL for the appropriate staffing component and this would be a charge in excess of fees for the “back room”. Conversely, and unfortunately this has happened, a community can ask FVRL to provide services at a level just barely good enough that the public will not complain. In both cases FVRL’s presence is largely secondary. The library user is presented with the Maple Ridge or Chilliwack Library a member of the Fraser Valley Regional Library.
Overall the system works. As population grows communities sometimes believe they can be more effective delivering service independently. With the growth of technology this becomes increasingly unlikely. However, there are provisions for withdrawal in the bylaws. FVRL is a physically large environment that serves suburban, small urban, tourist, and rural communities. Provincial law requires that a sitting city council member from each community sit on the library board. Managing a 15 member board from very diverse communities makes herding cats desirable. The fact that communities can choose mediocrity is painful for library staff but assures long term system viability.
The FVRL model is not perfect but it contains the seeds for rational regional library service delivery. In the next few blogs I intend to explore how a regional library could be developed in Central Iowa.
FVRL was established in the early 1930’s to serve the sparsely populated Lower Mainland of British Columbia that lies outside the City of Vancouver. Fast forward 75 years and the Lower Mainland is the fastest growing area of Canada with all of the environmental and growth issues that surround any metro area. Currently FVRL delivers service to over 650,000 people living in 15 communities in an area of 13,000 square kilometers.
Why does regionalization work and what does it mean in this environment? What are the shortfalls of this arrangement? Why are accountants the last creative people left in Hollywood?
In FVRL , regionalization is primarily about consolidating “back room” operations and providing opportunities for local identity. The “back room” consists almost exclusively of support services. These services include marketing and printing, acquisitions, cataloging, and processing, information technology, accounting, personnel management, and library administration. All of these services are housed together in a headquarters building that is the only property owned by FVRL.
The “back room” is a cost shared by all 15 communities based on a formula that can be described as the full employment act for accountants. Basically cost is apportioned based on population, circulation, and library square footage and is far less than any community operating independently would invest. The benefits of this arrangement to library users are more than financial.
First and foremost policies are consistent throughout the region. A customer can travel from Boston Bar, to Abbotsford, to Port Coquitlam and encounter the same circulation periods for materials, identical overdue fines, rules for Internet use, and be assured that the privacy of their records receives the same care. Second, there is a single union contract for all employees throughout the system. The benefits of a master contract, as opposed to 15 individual ones, are myriad. Third, a uniform online catalog makes information about library holdings more readily accessible. Fourth, pooling funds for acquisitions allows more titles and copies to be acquired and shared. Fifth, materials produced by the system have a uniform and professional appearance. These are the benefits that come quickly to mind.
Each community owns its building and is responsible for its maintenance. Communities also decide on the program they want to present their public. If a community wants to be open 72 hours a week and have a vigorous Children’s Services presence they would contract with FVRL for the appropriate staffing component and this would be a charge in excess of fees for the “back room”. Conversely, and unfortunately this has happened, a community can ask FVRL to provide services at a level just barely good enough that the public will not complain. In both cases FVRL’s presence is largely secondary. The library user is presented with the Maple Ridge or Chilliwack Library a member of the Fraser Valley Regional Library.
Overall the system works. As population grows communities sometimes believe they can be more effective delivering service independently. With the growth of technology this becomes increasingly unlikely. However, there are provisions for withdrawal in the bylaws. FVRL is a physically large environment that serves suburban, small urban, tourist, and rural communities. Provincial law requires that a sitting city council member from each community sit on the library board. Managing a 15 member board from very diverse communities makes herding cats desirable. The fact that communities can choose mediocrity is painful for library staff but assures long term system viability.
The FVRL model is not perfect but it contains the seeds for rational regional library service delivery. In the next few blogs I intend to explore how a regional library could be developed in Central Iowa.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Regionalization #3
Regionalization of services is a risk. But without risk there is no reward. The only reasons to consolidate services are improved cost controls and better service delivery. I believe that many areas throughout the United States would be well served by crafting regional service plans. Further, I believe there are models available to emulate.
How will costs be better controlled in a regional environment? First, some levels of duplication should be eliminated. Back room functions like acquisitions, cataloging and processing are essential but relatively expensive. These are functions that would be consolidated and whether outsourced or done locally should increase efficiency. The online catalog is another example of potential savings through consolidation. Library administration including marketing, facilities management, and information technology also offer opportunities for cost control. Second branch locations can be examined to determine effectiveness and need. Without a local “pride of ownership” library leadership can make a more realistic determination of return on investment.
Will services improve? Yes. Simply by providing a uniform online catalog and marrying it to a robust delivery system end users will benefit because they would have more access to more material. Also, from a customer point of view, a standardized policy for fines, circulation periods, and Internet access would be prove helpful. Opportunities for staff development would also be improved and technological experimentation benefits would accrue to all participants.
There are regional libraries in the United States and Canada that work. The State of Washington has several regional libraries. I worked in British Columbia and was the C.E.O. for the Fraser Valley Regional Library. In my next blog I plan to talk about Fraser Valley and explore what could be borrowed and what should be discarded.
How will costs be better controlled in a regional environment? First, some levels of duplication should be eliminated. Back room functions like acquisitions, cataloging and processing are essential but relatively expensive. These are functions that would be consolidated and whether outsourced or done locally should increase efficiency. The online catalog is another example of potential savings through consolidation. Library administration including marketing, facilities management, and information technology also offer opportunities for cost control. Second branch locations can be examined to determine effectiveness and need. Without a local “pride of ownership” library leadership can make a more realistic determination of return on investment.
Will services improve? Yes. Simply by providing a uniform online catalog and marrying it to a robust delivery system end users will benefit because they would have more access to more material. Also, from a customer point of view, a standardized policy for fines, circulation periods, and Internet access would be prove helpful. Opportunities for staff development would also be improved and technological experimentation benefits would accrue to all participants.
There are regional libraries in the United States and Canada that work. The State of Washington has several regional libraries. I worked in British Columbia and was the C.E.O. for the Fraser Valley Regional Library. In my next blog I plan to talk about Fraser Valley and explore what could be borrowed and what should be discarded.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Regionalization #2
As previously threatened, I plan to continue exploring the benefits of library regionalization and the reasons it is extremely difficult to accomplish. I recognize that there are many obstacles, but there are also many benefits, and I firmly believe a methodology can be developed that can answer most, if not all, concerns.
In my experience people and communities resist change because they fear they will lose something of value and that the new offering will fall short of what they already have. Therefore, the questions that need to be answered are what do people believe their libraries offer and what do they believe they will lose if regionalization occurs.
My first inclination is that regionalization is resisted by urban centers through arrogance. There seems to be an assumption that suburban areas should simply accept the policies, procedures, and opinions of their older and more experienced neighbors. Over the years I can not count the numbers of times I’ve heard a colleague say, “if we only had x’s tax base we would be able to…” Of course this doesn’t recognize that if x’s tax base were available, priorities might well shift.
Suburbs, not surprisingly, tend to resent such an attitude. They have spent years building their communities and, whether by happenstance or design, many of them are homogeneous and do not have to address issues of racial or economic diversity. They can recognize some rather important side benefits in that the costs of dealing with the poor are controlled (hence lower taxes) and property values are protected. The notion of “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..." is not a statement typically associated with American suburbs.
Admittedly I have a rather cynical and jaded view of why there are so many political jurisdictions across the United States. However, I also have recognized over time that many suburban communities have hired highly competent staff and sufficiently funded their local library to a point where service delivery is competitive if not superior (especially in Children’s Services and some areas of collection development) with their urban neighbors. If this is the case, why would any library participate in a regionalization scheme with an urban neighbor with a history of financial woes?
First, and most importantly, is that overall service to end users will be improved. Second, with some creative and cooperative thinking, a regional system could be created that encourages local libraries to continue to be identified with their local community while allowing for variable funding at the local level.
Tune in next time for service benefits.
In my experience people and communities resist change because they fear they will lose something of value and that the new offering will fall short of what they already have. Therefore, the questions that need to be answered are what do people believe their libraries offer and what do they believe they will lose if regionalization occurs.
My first inclination is that regionalization is resisted by urban centers through arrogance. There seems to be an assumption that suburban areas should simply accept the policies, procedures, and opinions of their older and more experienced neighbors. Over the years I can not count the numbers of times I’ve heard a colleague say, “if we only had x’s tax base we would be able to…” Of course this doesn’t recognize that if x’s tax base were available, priorities might well shift.
Suburbs, not surprisingly, tend to resent such an attitude. They have spent years building their communities and, whether by happenstance or design, many of them are homogeneous and do not have to address issues of racial or economic diversity. They can recognize some rather important side benefits in that the costs of dealing with the poor are controlled (hence lower taxes) and property values are protected. The notion of “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..." is not a statement typically associated with American suburbs.
Admittedly I have a rather cynical and jaded view of why there are so many political jurisdictions across the United States. However, I also have recognized over time that many suburban communities have hired highly competent staff and sufficiently funded their local library to a point where service delivery is competitive if not superior (especially in Children’s Services and some areas of collection development) with their urban neighbors. If this is the case, why would any library participate in a regionalization scheme with an urban neighbor with a history of financial woes?
First, and most importantly, is that overall service to end users will be improved. Second, with some creative and cooperative thinking, a regional system could be created that encourages local libraries to continue to be identified with their local community while allowing for variable funding at the local level.
Tune in next time for service benefits.
Monday, April 20, 2009
REGIONALIZATION, REGIONALIZATION, REGIONALIZATION
I believe public library growth and survival are tied to two very political issues. The first is regionalization and the second is direct funding. Over the next several blogs I hope to address both of these issues in some detail.
Regionalization speaks to the consolidation of governmental units. It’s not a popular topic but it is one taxpayers should insist that local governments explore if for no other reason than to save their money and improve service delivery.
Invariably there is fear that governmental consolidation will lead to someone’s ox being gored. That is a realistic concern. If consolidation is to generate savings in personnel intensive operation like libraries jobs will have to be eliminated. The real question is what jobs?
My answer is savings must come from the backroom. In a physically small county with a population of less than 500,000 how many library directors and deputy directors are required? The same question can be asked regarding I.T., cataloging and processing, business management and marketing departments.
From a purely bureaucratic point of view the issue has less to do with saving taxpayer dollars than with security. Why should anyone with a fairly secure management position want to put his or her job on the line? I think organizational survival lies in strengthening the institution. The institution is only going to get stronger under a different paradigm. I believe that paradigm must include organizational consolidations.
Over the next few months I want to explore how regionalization could be implemented, benefits that could accrue from library mergers, why independent funding of libraries is important, and what laws would have to be passed or amended to achieve this.
I am well aware that I’m not the first, nor will I be the last, to propose governmental consolidation. It’s an emotional topic. Ultimately it becomes a discussion of 19th century law being applied to a 21st century reality that forces us to examine any number of disparities in our communities.
Regionalization speaks to the consolidation of governmental units. It’s not a popular topic but it is one taxpayers should insist that local governments explore if for no other reason than to save their money and improve service delivery.
Invariably there is fear that governmental consolidation will lead to someone’s ox being gored. That is a realistic concern. If consolidation is to generate savings in personnel intensive operation like libraries jobs will have to be eliminated. The real question is what jobs?
My answer is savings must come from the backroom. In a physically small county with a population of less than 500,000 how many library directors and deputy directors are required? The same question can be asked regarding I.T., cataloging and processing, business management and marketing departments.
From a purely bureaucratic point of view the issue has less to do with saving taxpayer dollars than with security. Why should anyone with a fairly secure management position want to put his or her job on the line? I think organizational survival lies in strengthening the institution. The institution is only going to get stronger under a different paradigm. I believe that paradigm must include organizational consolidations.
Over the next few months I want to explore how regionalization could be implemented, benefits that could accrue from library mergers, why independent funding of libraries is important, and what laws would have to be passed or amended to achieve this.
I am well aware that I’m not the first, nor will I be the last, to propose governmental consolidation. It’s an emotional topic. Ultimately it becomes a discussion of 19th century law being applied to a 21st century reality that forces us to examine any number of disparities in our communities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
