The Good Library Blog

From those comments:

"The most irritating aspect is the reference to 'national standards'. Although I can appreciate the need to ensure consistent service nationwide, York Library is at the end of the day a facilily run by the Council for the benefit of the local community. Surely the needs of this community should take precedence over the need to make figures look good on paper."

It's not just me that thinks that way, then!

I like the national standards (well, most of them), but don't worry they are all to be abolished as part of the Local Government White Paper - instead we will have probably one indicator about Cultural Services - if we are very very lucky we might get a library one too, but that doesn't seem likely at the moment.

Can someone tell me what is wrong with minimum standards for how long libraries should be open (PLSS 2), how many items they should add to stock per head of population (PLSS9), and how good people think they are (PLSS 7 & 8)?

What is wrong with saying libraries should be open long hours, have lots of books, and be nice enough for people to enjoy them?

Oh, tell you what, we can "commission lifelong learning and other policy outcomes for local communities" instead. Pfah.

The trouble with the standards is the fact that there is huge pressure to meet arbitrary metrics that don't take into account the individual needs of each service - plus there is no reward for achieving them.

I know the Mr. Coates and I don't see eye to eye on the opening hours thing, but personally I see it as being another factor best left to each service (and indeed each branch) to set for themselves, *based on consultation with their customers*, rather than the arbitrary decision of some Whitehall suit who only understands that bigger numbers sound better in speeches.

As to the PLUS surveys on library satisfaction, what is the point in only surveying people that you find using the library about whether it meets their needs? That's why you get 90+% satisfaction results from the surveys at the same time as lower footfall as the months go by. 90% of people *in libraries* are satisfied with them, of course; but the opinions of the people *not* using them would be vastly more telling (not to mention useful).

Library standards should be set by each individual service in consultation with the local population. Policy centralisation has brought us to where we are today, and it's not going to save us any time soon.

I'm not against you on the matter of standards Mr Armchair. My view about opening hours is the same as you: that they should be as long as is sensible and safe. For me, that would be the standard and the judge would be the local community (not just users or employees, as you say).. nor do I really disagree with the Duchess: my objection to the standards as they are written is that they are incomprehensible. The standard for opening hours applies to a whole council and calls for opening hours to exceed
"128 hours per 1000 population per annum." So what on earth does that mean?: how can I tell if my local library is as good as the Government intends when that is the statement?

The same is true of PLSS 8 and 9: they talk about "items" of stock purchased and nowhere specifiy whether books are important or not. As I have been heard to say-- a library could buy a lot of ice creams and meet the standards-- that's no good.

But I agree with Mr Armchair-- if you give the job of running the library service to a local council, the local people should be able to demand that they run high standard of operation. If they need help to do that, then I am here to advise-- and I'm sure lots of other people would be, too. But the responsiblity must be clear and not fall between different authorities. It must be obvious "Who's in Charge?" -- as one says.

A lot of the problems at York Libraries seem to arise from this: http://www.gomadthinking.com - the staff at York Libraries have been subjected to this brainwashing since Summer 2006.