The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) has established a task force to identify trends and major issues of importance to the success of academic and research libraries. A series of discussions have been held to gather information to support the work of the task force. This ARL session was another of those meetings. Shirley Baker represents ARL on the Task Force; also attending the ARL session were ACRL Task Force members Joe Hewitt, representing IFLA and Joan Lippincott, representing CNI, and Helen Spaulding, ACRL President.
This discussion looked not only at the seven issues that have currently been identified through the ACRL task force discussions, but also considered the items identified as developmental priorities for ARL. Baker asked the group, were the ARL priorities related to the ARL directors’ views of the future and did priorities shift when thinking about either ACRL or local issues?
Ernie Ingles responded that the number one item on ACRL, Recruitment, was indeed one of the most important issues for both ACRL and ARL. He characterizes this as the “Rs”: recruitment, retention, resuscitation (those waiting to go), retirement, repatriation (a Canadian issue), remuneration (we are stealing from each other), and restructuring. The future of research libraries depends on human resources and we are not bringing in the younger people who are traditionally the most innovative. If we hire young people, we tend to bury them in bureaucracies. Other participants agreed we need people who are innovative and flexible, and they may not be library school trained. Research libraries need to consider hiring different types of people because of the need for their skills and characteristics and the MLS degree may be irrelevant to some positions (e.g., special collections). Libraries do need people with other skills, but this does not nullify the MLS and will have to find ways to socialize non-MLS PhDs or advanced-degree staff with the current staff. Library staff will become more involved in teaching and day-to-day work will be outsourced.
Research libraries should also be thinking about what might happen if we aren’t successful in our recruitment efforts – how will our organizations respond? We should think more about how current staff are used – what motivates them, how can we challenge and support them? Many research libraries have pushed responsibilities down to support staff. This will mean an emphasis on organizational development and the ability to find room for change and growth among our staff. If staff are willing to grow and change, they can be guaranteed a job – but perhaps not the same job they have now.
Participants in the discussion identified other areas or trends to consider. One is the need to develop new measures for assessing performance (and the need to train our staff in this area). Marketing and PR is another area in which libraries need to be concerned. We are competing with information alternatives and could be bypassed if we do not effectively sell ourselves. Space issues – fighting the myth of the virtual library while trying to maintain physical space – are critical. There is need for some sort of national statement on library space. This may be something that ARL’s Task Force on Collections and Access could address.
It was recommended that more thought be put into the impact of the external environment – the list is internally focused. One example from the external is Dublin Core. While its development came from outside the traditional library community, libraries have embraced and incorporated it. We need to look for more opportunities like that. Also missing are references to the balancing act libraries have with local and multi-consortial activities. Cooperation can both create opportunities and tie an organization’s hands. This is especially evident with patrons who may use several libraries within a consortium. There is an absence of language about library collections –only the small statement in the ACRL document about digital resources. Also missing from the ACRL statement was language regarding leadership and diversity.
It was recommended that the word “chaos” in scholarly communication in the ACRL list be changed. Perhaps “dysfunctional system” was more appropriate.
Spaulding indicated to the group that the next steps in this Focus on the Future process were to refine the list based on the comments from meetings such as this. They will also be collecting comments received in response to a brief article that is to appear in the next C&RL News by Lee Hisle. The list will continue to be updated and refined.
3M has provided support for the @ your library campaign and a toolkit for academic and research libraries is in development. A key message is necessary in order to reach the variety of communities we serve. After development of the toolkit, ACRL will conduct “train the trainer” sessions and a manual will be placed on the web for those who wish to take advantage of it. Professor Jean-Claude Guédon updated ARL directors on the strategies the Open Society Institute (OSI) is pursuing to advance open access in Eastern Europe, Russia, and China. A member of the Information Sub-Board of OSI’s Board of Directors, Dr. Guédon has been a strong advocate of open access publishing and has played a key role in promoting its growth.