Embracing Change for Continuous Improvement

Progress implies change. Not all change is progress, but all progress requires change. Change can be planned or unplanned. Libraries have experienced some serious unplanned changes in the recent past; they have been buffeted by changes in technology and scholarly communication and the downturn in the economy. Even so, most libraries have adapted wonderfully to the changes and challenges created by the new technologies. Now is the time to plan for improvements in customer service and to create a cadre of loyal customers.

The box below, developed from conversations with some state librarians and leaders in public libraries, suggests areas in which public librarians need expertise as new challenges arise. Those areas    help to define the library’s role in community building, which encompasses economic development, redevelopment and neighborhoods, workforce development, and civic engagement. In an April 2009 presentation at Simmons College reviewing these issues, San Francisco City Librarian Luis Herrera stressed the importance of service development, or reinventing service models. This includes defining reference services and roles, functions and processes, the library as a place, and virtual versus physical space. Accountability and assessment should not exclude program evaluation and determining the value of library services. Technology and the internet pose new challenges and opportunities as libraries engage in content creation and keep pace with new applications.

Coping with these issues and challenges requires a workforce that is not confined to a particular area of the library and enjoys reaching out to the library’s communities. As part of coping, senior managers must manage stress and guard against staff suffering dangers cited by Thomas W. Shaughnessy in the July 1996 Journal of Academic Librarianship: “mental and physical exhaustion, burnout, frustration, low morale, and other symptoms of stress. In some instances the library’s structure adds to the distress by slowing response time, preventing cross-functional solutions to problems, and frustrating efforts to intervene.”

Due to the current economic recession, a number of libraries are experiencing severe reductions in operating budgets, resulting in an inability to keep pace with inflation and having to take funds for equipment purchases from the acquisitions budget. Budget cuts also produce downsizing and staff reassignment; the result is an increased workload for the staff. Some libraries are consolidating services at the same time as they reconfigure the physical plant. Complicating matters even more, a number of libraries are moving toward evidence-based decision-making and a workforce committed to demonstrating accountability and improved services. All in all, these changes suggest an extremely challenging, but rewarding, time for libraries and their staffs.

Gathering library metrics

The type of metrics that libraries have historically collected and reported has created stakeholder dissatisfaction because these metrics do not adequately reflect their contribution to their communities. The metrics typically comprise outputs or performance measures, but none reflect customer-focused outputs relating to service quality or satisfaction and outcomes—the impact of programs and services. For instance, how many people using the library résumé service or other job-related services found fulltime employment? Do children increase their reading levels after attending summer reading programs? If yes, by how many grade levels?

Such questions may involve accountability, which requires the adoption of a multiple-stakeholder framework and recognition that librarians are managers of complex service organizations. Any organization must balance its needs with those of other units in the institution, recognizing that budgeting occurs within a political context (e.g., competition with academic units and with other government agencies), while addressing issues of “How well?” “How satisfied?” “How productive?” and so forth. Consequently, the types of metrics that libraries use should settle on the quantitative and qualitative benefits that the library provides to its community.

Providing for Knowledge, Growth, and Prosperity: A Benefit Study of the San Francisco Public Library, a 2007 publication of the Friends of the San Francisco Public Library, notes that “for every dollar spent supporting SFPL, the citizens of San Francisco see a return in the range of $1.40 to $3.34.” Turning to academic libraries, Sawyer Library of Suffolk University informs full-time students that, for the 2008–09 academic year, they paid about $382 of their tuition to support the library, whereas a part-time student paid about $26 per credit hour. In return, depending on the frequency of their virtual or in-person visits, students would accrue a minimum value of $433.36 for use of library collections and services. Students and their parents can review the calculations of that amount if they are so inclined.