The Good Library Blog

Whither libraries?
A new report proposes radical solutions but will they work? Ralph Baxter reports
THE PUBLIC LIBRARY service can make annual savings of £22m by adopting a new supply structure, a new report has claimed. But Better Stock, Better Libraries, commissioned by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and compiled by Pricewaterhouse Coopers, has been called into question by some who dispute whether such savings can be achieved, or doubt the report will be implemented.
The report could lead to publishers boosting business through direct supply but, along with library suppliers, they would face greater discount demands. Both public libraries and library suppliers face the additional possibility of job losses if the report’s recommendations are implemented, leading to back office and processing functions dealt with in new regional centres.
A radical new business model for libraries is outlined, consisting of four components: An ‘e-marketplace’ would be created to order the vast majority of library stock online from any supplier wanting to offer its services; a national strategic commissioning body would manage the marketplace and assist with the quality of service provision; ten library ‘clusters’ would be created to secure back office efficiencies; and individual library authorities would then meet local demand.
The report estimates that the gross savings of more than £22m per annum will comprise additional discounts of up to 7.5% on average levels (saving nearly £10m) and a reduction in the cost of stock procurement of at least 35% (saving over £12m). The costs of implementing the report are estimated at between £4.5m and £7m. Currently, £85m a year is spent by public libraries on book stock.
Andrew Stevens, Senior Policy Adviser for Libraries at the MLA, told PN the report represented a major opportunity for the library service. “This is about changing how libraries work so they become more efficient, improving the customer experience and finding ways in which we can encourage other new entrants to the stock supply market.”
The projected savings are a conservative estimate, he added. The report would lead to an overhaul in staffing arrangements as the emphasis is placed on ‘customer facing’ roles in libraries over back office administration. Stevens acknowledged: “There are likely to be some redundancies at the end of the process. I would imagine that councils would be looking to move staff from one function to another where possible, but that is for them to decide.”
One key aspect of the report is to encourage new entrants into the supply market, including publishers, who would receive orders through the e-marketplace. Publishers consulted broadly welcomed the changes but said they wanted to see genuine willingness from libraries to improve technology. Amanda Ridout, MD of General Books at HarperCollins, added: “I am pleased that the Publishers Association Libraries Group has engaged with this project and look forward to being involved in further discussions. Our prime concern is that savings made in the book supply chain should be reinvested in book stocks in public libraries.”
Suppliers expressed concern over how the level of discount savings quoted could be achieved with Kathryn Pattinson, MD of Askews arguing: “It’s unrealistic to believe that the type and quantities of titles required by libraries can be bought at the discounts achieved by the likes of WH Smith, Tesco and Waterstone’s, for example. High levels of discount may be obtainable on best-selling titles but those levels of discount cannot be obtained from the majority of smaller publishers who contribute vastly to the wide range needed to provide the best possible social inclusion services to communities. Libraries could not, therefore, realistically achieve the same levels as the big retailers over their much more diverse range of material.” She concluded: “Unpalatable as it may seem, any significant cost savings would need to be from staff reduction/re-organisation rather than relying on additional discount.”
Culture Minister David Lammy hailed the report as one which will free up money to “bring libraries closer to the people who use them and to help them understand the needs of those who don’t.” However, Lammy, the focus of much of the criticism over the direction of the service, faced increased pressure from Mark Field, Shadow Culture Minister, who said the Government was “clueless” on libraries and added: “Whatever conclusions and recommendations this report makes are wasted because they will never be implemented. No action was ever taken after possible efficiencies were outlined in last year’s DCMS/PKF report and I’m sure the same will be true with this one.” He said the identification of administrative inefficiencies was useful but the proposed savings represent just 2% of library service costs.
But Stevens emphasised that significant support was in place to make the report effective. “We have brought local government and the Society of Chief Librarians with us during this process. This report will provide real service benefits to local library customers and we are not going to back down.” An implementation plan will be produced by the end of September before the MLA starts work on the realising the new systems. A phased implementation is planned, beginning June 2008.

Publishing News
Friday 18 August, 2006