Introduction Budget Administration

Collecting, Access, and Service Miscellaneous Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

The executive summary of the The Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC) Final Report lists two overarching recommendations (echoed with slightly different emphases in the Senate Committee on the Library's response) to the Library and the Berkeley campus:

• To restore the Library to its role as a leading research institution world-wide and to its proper place as a research complex at the heart of the intellectual community on this campus.

• To make explicit the shift in emphasis toward providing comprehensive access to library and research materials whenever ownership and on-site availability of materials is not feasible.

The members of the reviewing team believe these documents reveal two other important desires on the part of their authors:

• That broad-based consultative mechanisms for developing and communicating Library priorities and policies be set up that will engender greater confidence in the Library's overall direction and management on the part of campus administration, faculty and students, and Library staff.

• That, once this level of confidence is attained, the campus provide the University Librarian (UL) with the information, support, and authority to effectively carry out the restoration of the Library mentioned above.

Specific goals mentioned in the reports, along with recommended actions to achieve them, are listed below. Most of these address one of the four concerns mentioned above. Inevitably, however, some of the suggestions made in the three reports did not clearly fit into our categorization. These have been included at the end of the report in a section labeled "Miscellaneous Recommendations." The members of the review team also found some inconsistencies among the recommendations and qualifications expressed in regard to them, which it was decided to place in sections labeled "Concerns and Comments."

Return to Contents

---

BUDGET

Increase Library collections and operations budgets in order to support Library’s designated mission.

• Make permanent adjustment to collections base immediately.

• Plan for additional augmentations beginning in 1999-2000 and increasing 5-8% annually for the near future.

• Make permanent adjustment to operations base to restore staffing levels, renew the librarian corps, and support technology costs.
• The campus should subsidize costs associated with Library seismic projects to increase the amount of Library funds available for other operational needs.
• Encourage and expand projects to directly increase non-campus funding in support of the Library, including collections endowments, endowment-funded librarian positions, exploration of alternative revenue sources, cooperation with SIMS, reimbursement for services to Summer Session and Extension programs, in-kind donations, and pursuit of additional State funding in support of print collections.

Concerns and Comments

• While both the BRC and the Senate Committee on the Library (COL) agree on these recommendations generally, the COL suggested more liberal augmentations than those put forward by the BRC.
• The BRC acknowledged that its recommendation does not lead to a sustainable collections budget, nor does it provide for "catch-up" needs.

Develop sustainable collections and operations budget models that "[m]inimize [the] impact of inflation and demand for services, equipment, and materials."

• Develop a mechanism for determining where growth or reductions should occur and use it to make adjustments that will guarantee the campus' getting the most benefit from collections and operations dollars.

• Use quantitative methods to analyze collections and services. These could include zero base analyses, algorithms for allocating collections and/or staff, etc. (BRC)

• Hire additional qualified subject specialists with trained staff to plan and implement ongoing adjustments to collections allocations.

• Funding from the campus needs to accompany new or transforming programs.
• The campus must be willing to close programs if it cannot afford the necessary Library resources to support them.
• Expand the Library's involvement in cooperative collection development programs.

• Actively pursue the strategic use of UC purchasing power.

• Continue to provide leadership in the development and application of digital technologies, as this may provide savings in the future.

• Organize support for society publishing and University-controlled distribution of information.

• Organize concerted pressure on publishers, involving faculty in discussions of alternatives to current patterns of production, cost and ownership of scholarly research.

Concerns and Comments

• The COL is skeptical about and reluctant to spend restricted operations budget on information-gathering, time-consuming zero-base budget exercises, and complex quantitative studies, at the cost of basic services. Prefer to explore adapting academic allocation models to Library and research into what other libraries do.
• The COL is worried that increased access by others to our collections may cost more in terms of operating expenses and replacement than we gain through access to others’ collections. Recommends such arrangements, as well as consortial licensing arrangements, take local campus interests into account.
• The COL expressed concern that "Library savings in ‘processing costs’ [for digital materials] not be passed on to users for a greater total cost." Concerned that access to technology be equitable. Concerned about archiving, ownership, and governance at local and systemwide levels.

Achieve the most effective use of current and future Library funds

• Develop bases for rational allocation of collections and operations funds to academic areas.

• Ensure effective collection-building by assigning skilled subject selectors.

• Review staffing levels in Library disciplinary divisions to see that staffing conforms to population served.

• Investigate "tiers of access to services" which could make it possible to restrict access to some higher cost services which are essential to research scholars but less so to undergraduate students and the general public.

• Explore outsourcing human resources, computing support, and space planning functions.
• Make Bancroft and East Asian Library more self-supporting and less dependent on general funds.
• Report on involvement in and costs of digitization and acquisition of digital material.
• Report on staff time supporting CDL and other partnerships.
• Provide a summary of the cost and functions of the Library Systems Office and the Teaching Library.
• Report on anticipated equipment replacement costs.
• Reduce wasteful use of funding by assigning appropriately-skilled staff to tasks.

Concerns and Comments

• Concerned that, in the area of computer-based services and resources, there has been limited contact between the Library and the Commission on Campus Computing.

Return to Contents

---

ADMINISTRATION

Improve communication between the Library and the campus, especially the faculty and student users of the Library.

• Appoint a Library Advisory Board (LAB) that will provide a permanent mechanism that can be used by the UL for consultation and consensus building on major projects, plans, and priorities; that will work with the UL and the campus administration to create policy; and that will work with the UL to articulate priorities and policies to the campus.

• Initiate better communication by having a "dialogue establishing" retreat between the campus administration, the Library (both administration and staff) and a representative group of campus users. This must be done after the recruitment of the new UL.
• Establish a regularly scheduled annual process bringing together academic units, appropriate deans, and relevant library units. The needs expressed in these meetings would be refined in consultations between the Library and the academic deans, and the results would be sent to the UL and the COL.

• The campus administration to whom the Library reports must be made to provide timely and accurate information about short and long term academic plans to the Library.
• Participation of the UL in early academic policy discussions is needed so that the Library implications can be aired.
• Need to create new priority-setting processes for the University as a whole.
• Selectors and unit heads should continue to consult with academic units on issues regarding Library collections and operations, but extend their role to include larger-scale planning and resource allocation issues.
• The Library should work to strengthen role of departmental library committees.
• The Library should hire new subject specialists as necessary to confer with and support the needs of academic sub-communities.
• The Library should seek graduate students in its planning processes, and GSI's in particular in regard to issues concerning undergraduate needs.

• There should be better sharing of information between the Library and IST concerning long range plans to identify areas of overlap and mutual interest. The two groups should work jointly on projects where the two units have intersecting goals and priorities to economize efforts and to make sure that the results are compatible. They should also explore the possibility of linking their administrative structures.

• The campus should provide formal statements of implications for Library in all proposals for academic plans and programs.
• Involve the COL in Library space planning—Doe/Moffitt, seismic surges, NRLF Phase III, etc.—including detailed cost/benefits analyses for any branch consolidation proposals.

Concerns and Comments

• The COL is concerned about delegating additional responsibilities to deans, creating additional committees, and creating a joint committee in which the Senate is underrepresented. LAB should be postponed until new UL is in place, and should be given 3-year trial. COL rejects advocacy as primary role—instead, it represents faculty judgments and seeks a working relationship with Library and administration.

• The campus administration, for whatever reasons, chooses a rather closed forum to discuss and set overall academic policy. The External Advisory Group points out that the Library has been at the mercy of this modus operandi and thus has not received pertinent information from the campus in order to implement its prescribed mission.
• The External Committee expressed the fear that the Library will remain caught between the campus administration and the faculty.
• The Library's policies are not explained adequately to administration and faculty under current structure.

Recruit a highly qualified UL, and give him or her the authority and backing to create and enact library policies in his/her opinion to be the best for the institution.

• The campus should conduct a thorough and far-reaching search for a new UL.
• The campus should create an attractive environment, which will encourage the most qualified candidates to consider coming to Berkeley as a potentially crowning achievement to their career.

• The campus should select a candidate who 1) possesses knowledge of the fundamental issues facing research libraries today, 2) has strong management skills, 3) will work well with the campus administration to articulate academic priorities and 4) will be able to gain the trust of the campus users and Library staff.
• It is imperative that the Chancellor give the new UL the discretion and the resources to staff top management positions with suitable individuals.
• The campus should authorize the UL to create a flexible, non-compartmentalized budget and the discretion to move funds from one part of the budget to another as needed.
• Put budget on rolling two-year cycle, and give the Library the flexibility to allocate fiscal resources as it sees fit.
• The Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor must make it clear to the campus that the UL has their trust and support and that he/she speaks for them when Library policies are the issue.
• The UL needs to be closely informed about the campus’s academic priorities and shown as such to the campus community.
• The Library must have discretionary power to align priorities with that of the University
• The UL needs a forum to communicate Library policies to a broad enough constituency on campus to elicit "buy-in" to Library programs.
• The campus should arrange that the Offices of Human Resources in both the Library and the campus give stronger support to the Library administration in effecting the appropriate assignment, classification, and appointment of Library personnel, including the possible disciplining of those not performing at the level required by their job.
• No further shifts or reductions in operations budget until new management in place and new consultation processes start.

Concerns and Comments

• This recruitment must be done simultaneously with the attempt to rebuild trust between the campus and the Library and the Library and its staff.
• The new UL will come with certain expectations (e.g., restored funding) which the campus must provide to make the job attractive.
• The talent pool is thin for this high level position.
• The External Committee expressed the fear that traditional categories of "acquisitions", "personnel", and "technology" make budgeting process too rigid.
• The External Committee also expressed a concern that the UL has responsibility without the requisite authority.

Raise Library staff morale, taking serious steps to renew a sense of community and common purpose in the Library, within those areas where this sense has been eroded.

• Foster collaborative leadership in a climate of mutual trust.
• Consult widely and give evidence that the opinions of the rank-and-file are listened to and taken into account.
• Rebuild a sense of shared ownership, community and teamwork throughout the library.
• New positions created or vacant ones filled should be well-publicized. There should be open recruitment and applications should be solicited from the current staff.
• Librarians should be invited to be non-voting members of appropriate Academic Senate committees
• Serious performance standards must be set and performance evaluations must be done on schedule, with broad input from the user community served by the staff member.
• It is the responsibility of members of middle management to work for the good of the Library as a whole as well as for their own units.

Return to Contents

---

COLLECTING, ACCESS, AND SERVICE

Pursue an explicit strategy of ownership and access

• Educate the user community, both to help some adapt to access as an acceptable alternative and to remind others of the continued significance of traditional modes of scholarship.
• Encourage rapid document delivery mechanisms.

Concerns and Comments

• Worried about possibility of losing sight of the continued significance of the availability and accessibility of print collections, particularly browsing. (COL)
• The BRC recommends a strategy of comprehensive access where ownership is not possible, while the COL recommends a balanced strategy of access and ownership. It is not clear whether they have precisely the same thing in mind.

Improve and maintain access to print collections.

• Recognition that items like stack maintenance, reference instruction, well informed desk staff, and SLE retention determine whether the library works for its primary user community.
• Reduce faculty loan periods.
• Take into account condition of stacks, and needs for reference and instruction in digital and print sources by appropriate level of staff.
• Find effective ways of correcting catalog records.
• Explore the possibility of bringing appropriate Affiliated Libraries under Library management. At a minimum incorporate Affiliated Library holdings into Gladis.
• Expedite reshelving.
• Provide more extensive bibliographic instruction.
• Repair broken hardware rapidly.
• Find ways to advertise the availability of responsive and responsible staff.
• Consider browsability when deciding what materials to place on compact shelving.

Return to Contents

---

MISCELLANEOUS RECOMMENDATIONS

• Retain an Undergraduate Library.
• Reorganize Doe/Moffitt to provide spaces to humanities and social sciences users which are equivalent to branches.
• Adopt the concept of a "decentralized library system." (Doe is not Main.)
• Designate a single librarian to handle the responsibility for each library, including each branch and Doe.

Return to Top

---

---

Copyright (C) 1998-2002 by the Library, University of California, Berkeley. All rights reserved.
Document maintained by: Ralph Moon

Last update 3/12/02. Server manager: Contact