[Publib] Perplexed Librarian 2007 – Part Four/Two

[Gerald Ward]

In the last three posts I have expressed perplexity about how and why staff 
and “customers” are treated the way they are.  Without becoming long-winded, 
I believe every person is valuable simply because they are.  I also believe 
every person can, but may not, contribute value to an organization, such as 
the Library.  The persons value, and the value they contribute, are two 
separate yet closely connected things.  In addition, the “customer” is a 
valuable part of every organization, especially a library.  When staff and 
the “customer” are not treated as valuable, whether as an individual or a 
contributor to the organization, the evidence of such treatment is glaring.  
No amount of rhetoric will negate that evidence.  Even if the evidence is 
incidental, where there is a large number of people independently saying 
they are treated badly, ignored, or leaving, being forced into retirement, 
calling the Union, etc., these people cannot be ignored.

There are 341 total full-time equivalent positions in the large public 
library serving the Sacramento area.   Of these positions, there are about 
200 filled with people who I will call the “face” of the library.  These are 
the people who interact with the public for hours every day.  There are 26 
branches and a main library.  Obviously, the main library, with about 40 
total positions, has the largest contingent of staff interacting with the 
public.  This leaves approximately 160 staff to work the branches, or about 
6 people per branch.  There are branches with only 3 people on staff and 
some with over a dozen.  When the numbers are crunched, looking at the total 
hours open to the public, the number of staff in each branch, figuring for 
vacation and sick time, there are not nearly enough people working for the 
library.  I am hitting this hard because the lack of staff has the greatest 
impact on the negative circumstances confronting this system.

While the number of line staff, the “face” of the library, has decreased 
over the last few years the number of administrative staff has increased.  
The reason for this is the nature of our system.  We are a Joint-Powers 
Authority, now orphaned by both the City and County Governments.  This means 
we have to build our own bureaucracy to replace those used in the past.  
This has its own inherent problems.  The most glaring is the almost total 
lack of Library-Librarian experience characterizing those in Administrative 
responsibility.  Those in authority have the MLIS but not the experience 
working with the public.  The perception is they sit in their Administrative 
offices (the “Ivory Tower”) unaware of what is happening in the Branches, 
then make decisions about what they want to happen, visualizing how it is 
supposed to work without being familiar with real-life before the public.

Let me present some evidence.  Those who administer the library were at one 
time reference librarians working a public desk.  It has been so long since 
they worked a public desk, and the environment has changed so drastically, 
they are no longer qualified to do so.  They do not know the reference 
sources, the people of the community who use the library, or the technology 
used daily.  Then they hire people who will provide support to the 
front-line staff, for instance, through technology development and 
collection development.  Our Head of Technology has an MLIS but has never 
worked a reference or public service desk.  I have seen him help individual 
“customers” on the floor.  Our head of Collection Development has an MLIS 
but has never worked a reference or public service desk.  They haven’t even 
been catalogers.  They are valuable people, contributing value to the 
organization.  But without the necessary experience they are unable to 
comprehend fully the reason we exist, or provide real-life support for the 
problems we encounter.  They do not think like those who “face” the public 
for hours every day. They provide support and solve problems, but not the 
way an experienced library staff would.  The Administrators we have are very 
good at working the bureaucracy.

There are three major areas impacted by an administrative staff who work the 
bureaucracy well but do not have the hands-on experience of those who “face” 
the public.  First, the philosophy held by those who make decisions about 
what the library is supposed to be, what it does, and how it is maintained 
impacts how staff do their work and which “customers” we attract.  Second, 
the policies and procedures implemented, and enforced, define the 
environment in which both staff and “customer” co-exist. Finally, in this 
system they have the responsibility of how public funds are spent, whether 
on salaries, facilities, collections or contractors.  The real-life 
experience of the Administrator will determine the extent of the 
effectiveness of the library.  Let me state openly, I am not trying to 
dictate to Administration how to do their job, or what their job is.  I do 
not have a list of demands I expect them to implement.  Even when I suggest 
they should hire more people, or decrease hours, the expectation is not they 
will comply because I say they should.

Do the Administrators of the Library need librarian experience to do their 
jobs?  Does that experience need to be recent or on-going?  I know libraries 
are changing so is my thinking about this situation wrong and my 
expectations unreasonable?

Gerald F. Ward
SPLibrarian at hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes from Microsoft 
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0540003042mrt/direct/01/