« Public Libraries and the Net Book Agreement | Main | Intervene in Lambeth »
December 3, 2008
No way forward
It is exactly 4 years ago this week that Andrew Lord Macintosh, then Minister for libraries, in response to 'Who's in Charge' a report in which were highlighted huge inefficiencies in the way that the library service works, called for an efficiency review. Consultants (PKF) were briefed in detail as to where to look and what to look for.
The diagnosis was that 20% of the problem lay in the practices of the suppliers, as called for by libraries, and 80% lay inside the operation of the public libraries themselves. It was to be found in both back room and front room operation.
As PKF began to analyse what this was all about and how it could be addressed, the Society of Chief Librarians drew themselves on to the tips of their toes and blew as hard as they collectively could to prevent any candle light being shone on the internal workings of libraries. They dismissed all effective work on the 80%. The remaining 20% was tackled in two parts-- the suppliers engaged in fearsome competition and removed the first 10%. The MLA undertook one of the most ludicrous investigations in history called 'Better Stock Better Libraries' and after several years and a million pounds of wasted fees on consultants (mostly Price Waterhouse Cooper) absolutely nothing was done on the other 10%. 90% of the waste was not addressed and most of it still remains. It is about £200m per annum in the whole public library service of the UK. The ten percent improvement can be seen in the improved discounts now available to public libraries which have increased the purchasing power of the book funds by about £20-25m .
That remaining £200m per annum could have been used to restore book collections and buildings. After 4 years the service would now be in something like decent shape.
This description of the work done is all true except for one small glimmer, one tiny ember, which was, during the programme, the engagement of BIC, the book industry communications body who have worked so effectively for the publishing world in the last two decades. BIC, used properly, could make huge inroads. Their project became called E4 libraries. That implied using standard electronic communication to prevent replicated management in 200 councils. It applies to every back room activity from placing orders, to lending, to cataloguing to the tags used in the new Radio Frequency identification chips (RFID). If there could be a recognised standard for the messages in all these and in other book servicing, then each of 200 councils would not have to invent and sustain their own. It is the way communication works in all other aspects of books and journals. It is those inventions of systems and processes which cause most of the wasted effort across the different councils. (Each council has a cataloguer ... etc)
BIC were invited to assess the situation which they have done in a number of excellent reports by Simon Edwards. However, like so many reports and initiatives before them such good work on its own is not sufficient to bring change. For any one council to achieve the savings and improvements that it can requires a detailed work programme to be worked out (probably with BIC to assist in writing it) and a commitment from senior council mangement to make the changes identified. In other words it is very important for BIC to be employed, either by the MLA or by a collective of councils to see their work through to fruition.
Without the continuation of this programme in place and working actively we are not making progress and the public deserve some after all this time.
Posted by Perkins at December 3, 2008 9:29 AM