« August 2010 | Main | October 2010 »
September 29, 2010
Issues of E books
Thank you to all those who contributed to the discussion on ebooks below.
It seems to me that there are issues that somehow have to be resolved, and I cannot see who is going to resolve them. Roughly speaking my list is
- Fear of web spreading of free editions.. If a copy obtained through a library can be made into a widely available free download then publishers and authors will no longer be able to earn from the sale and distrbution and the retail market will collapse. This is by and large what has happened in the music market
- No resolution yet of Public Lending Right payment to authors for loans
- No restriction on who uses individual library websites. Anyone can potentially use any council website and anyone from anywhere can join any library service.
- The cost
- Standardisation of library systems
- Whether libraries can or should charge for lending ebooks.
- The management time spent on this matter in 150 councils
- The availability of readers for people who can't afford them.
- The nature of the ebook market for backlist, childrens books etc: those areas where public libraries operate most
- The future of reference works
And presumably several others. My central point was that I see poltiticians and pundits saying that the future problems of the public library service can in part be resolved by the expansion of the use of e-books-- particularly in remote areas where a question mark hangs over community libraries-- I wanted to say that there are serious questions that need to be addressed before that is true.
There are those who are keen to see this development proceed quickly, but, as my regular correspondent James Christie always correctly observers, the library world has a tendency to embrace new technologies rather more eagerly than economics and value would sometimes suggest they should. Then there are other people who trade in the market for publications who have reasonable fears for what will happen and whose views need to be heard. And then there are those of us who pay for the public library service who are entitled to see a proper explanation of the likely use of future funds, before we embark on yet more investment of this kind
Of the bodies from whom one might seek answers the list is the same old ones: DCMS, MLA, CILIP, SCL, PA etc... and one wonders why we have got this far into the life cycle of ebooks without any proper answers, or any proper understanding of the questions. Someone among those needed to find out what the detail was and make some proposals. I have never seen one. They need to get started now. I understand others are about to raise this whole issue and request that this time better brains are brought to it.
This is no longer a time for debate, but a time for concensus and action.. However this time, in contrast to the work that was done on the People' Network, I would plead strongly that the development of ebooks in libraries is placed firmly within the context of the whole role and purpose of a library, not as if it were a subject on its own. The priorities for nearly all the population is to have smart well designed, well stocked libraries that are open long hours-- not libraries (and library managers) that are dominated by technical developments.
Posted by Perkins at 8:00 AM | Comments (13)
September 27, 2010
Lewisham
Lewisham council proposed several weeks ago to close 5 of their 12 libraries. At the time they gave little information about the financial reasons why they needed to do this, nor did they explain how they intend thence to provide a public library service according to the statutory obligations upon them.
Since that time the local people have asked for detailed answers to both those points and many others and have received nothing that would persuade a rational councillor or member of the public that such answers exist.
The local people have also written to the Secretary of State asking for him to call for an inquiry and to fulfill his legal duties and responsibilities.
All of us who believe in and call for improvements to public libraries, rather than their destruction by stealth should call upon the councillors of Lewisham to withdraw the plan for closures and to use the available resources they havre to seek to make the libraries better than they are now instead of worse
Thus I call upon the Minister, the DCMS, the DCLG, the ACL, the Mayor of London, the board of the LLCP, the London Cultural Improvement programme, the LGA, the MLA, CILIP, the SCL, IdeA, London MP's, Parliament, the local political parties and unions and all other bodies, to ask the Mayor of Lewisham to propose a new plan in place of that which his council has recently published.
Posted by Perkins at 11:20 AM | Comments (1)
September 22, 2010
E books in public libraries
How often do we see public librarians, councillors, state officials, politicians and even ministers spouting off about e-books in the future of public libraries.
None of them are stars in the arithmetic class.
It only takes a few simple calculations to realise that if we were to hold the same range of books in public libraries as we do now to support that council public library book funds would have to be ten times the size they are now
And that is without buying ebook readers for the very hard up people for whom public libraries are a life line.
Nor is anyone hearing the voice of Booksellers - who just plain don't want public libraries to offer for nothing that out of which they try to make their living.
e books are not for public libraries. ... just now anyhow.
Posted by Perkins at 7:55 PM | Comments (24)
London Libraries Change Programme Phase 3
There is a new document describing phase 3 of the London Libraries Change Programme
With these statements one has to learn not to be fooled by the odd and obscure language used by state officials. Simply go through the document and seek out where it says
- When there will be more books and how many
- When the opening hours will be increased and by how much
- When buildings will be improved
(Because we know, without any need for research, that those are the three things people want)
and in a managerial sense - how can the annual cost of the service be reduced from £200m per annum, to, say £150m ? - which is a cut of only 25% at a time when people are talking of even greater figures.
I'm afraid you won't find them
--- here it is,
London Library Change Programme
Phase 3: Making Transformational Change Happen
Bulletin no. 6: September 2010
Funded by Capital Ambition, LLCP (which is one strand of the wider London Cultural
Improvement Programme) is supporting boroughs to find new models library service delivery
that will both reduce costs and better meet customer needs.
Two preliminarily phases of work explored individual service efficiencies, and sharing of backoffice
functions. Building on these foundations, Capital Ambition agreed to fund phase three
of the LLCP to support boroughs to look at new models of shared service.
In July 2010, London Councils agreed to assist the programme by appointing consultants to
deliver phase 3. Using the Buying Solutions framework and competitive proposals, Mott
MacDonald, working with Eighty Twenty Insight, was appointed following assessment of
written proposals and interview.
By the end of September 2010, LLCP will offer boroughs a series of tools to inform the budget
setting period in autumn 2010 by delivering:
• a strategic options framework to enable Boroughs to validate, challenge, and develop their
strategic decision-making around their future library services;
• case studies and scenarios to support and illustrate the strategic options framework,
including financial models;
• a planning toolkit to enable Boroughs to prepare for change.
The tools and findings will be shared with Leaders and both Cabinet Members for Culture and
Finance in early October.
This phase of LLCP work is running in tandem to the new support programme for libraries,
recently announced by Culture Minister Ed Vaizey, which includes two pilots in London. We
will be working with the pilots to share learning. As this stage of LLCP work will be delivered
in early October, we expect the results will be of assistance in the development of the pilots.
The two support programme pilots in London are:
• Closer Working in South East London (Bexley, Bromley, Croydon, Greenwich, Lambeth,
Lewisham, Southwark), looking at options and opportunities for improving quality and
reducing costs by working more closely together
• Joint Delivery of library services (Hammersmith & Fulham, Kensington & Chelsea),
exploring the feasibility of sharing library services to be delivered or commissioned jointly
across borough borders.
http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/networks/lcip/londonlibrarychangeprogramme.htm.
2
Phase 3:
The strategic options framework will be structured around a series of dimensions of potential
change, including:
Customer – Exploring how to reconfigure capabilities for service delivery via the different
customer channels and by considering the potential for shared services and integration with
other agencies and authorities.
Business Models – Exploring the potential benefits and implications of alternative service
delivery models which may include shared services, outsourcing or trusts.
Support – Exploring how to reconfigure the provision of specialist services, library support
services, and general support services by considering workforce, business processes and the
implications for the enabling ICT infrastructure including virtualisation.
Technology Infrastructure – (i) Exploring strategic options for library ICT infrastructure and
applications which meet the requirements of customer and support services, e.g. CRM and
ERP platforms; and (ii) Exploring specialised technology options which contribute towards
cost reduction and potentially add value to the customer experience and staff ways of
working.
With thirty three boroughs, operating on different corporate and library systems and individual
contract timelines, this is inevitably an extremely complex programme. It is crucial to plan
carefully and not lose the best of what exists, and recognise individual borough requirements
and the way libraries integrate within wider corporate priorities and services in each borough.
Timescales
August - September:
Contractor works with LLCP board and boroughs to develop draft costed business
models.
October
Capital Ambition reviews progress
London Councils Forum of Elected Members discuss options
October to March
Subject to decisions by Elected Members and Capital Ambition LLCP board will ask
contractor to work up detailed models and action plan for implementation by boroughs from
April 2011.
Who is accountable for the programme
The LLCP board is accountable to the Shared Services and Joint Procurement Board of
Capital Ambition. Its members are Andrew Holden, MLA (Chair); Paul Martin (CEO, LB
Sutton), Myfanwy Barrett (Director of Resources, LB Harrow); Mike Clarke (President, London
Libraries and Head of Libraries, LB Camden); David Ruse (Director of Libraries, City of
Westminster); Diana Edmonds (Head of Culture, LB Haringey); David Pearson (Director of
Libraries, City of London); Ted Rogers (London Libraries Consortium and Head of Libraries,
LB Hackney); Caroline Stanger (ex officio, Capital Ambition). Cabinet Members for Libraries
are shortly to be nominated through London Councils following the local elections in May.
Posted by Perkins at 10:20 AM | Comments (4)
Scottish ban on Israeli authors
From Lis Pub Libs, the website of the British Library Profession
"Our local authority has taken the decision to boycott Israeli goods, which appears to extend to books written by Israeli authors. Whilst we support the principle behind the corporate decision, we are naturally concerned about the message this sends out about how our libraries are stocked and the implications this has".
One has to hope that the Israelis don't reciprocate, I suppose. This is an original way to pursue world peace and harmony. .. called Stupid. Ah but, the library profession are good at standing up for what they do, as we have so often seen here. Especially the Scots and the English ones.
Posted by Perkins at 8:47 AM | Comments (9)
September 20, 2010
Standard platforms
In the previous entry I talked about National Standard platforms for providing everything that an individual community library needs to offer really high quality local services.
The purpose of these is to eliminate all the costs which are incurred at council level and to allow a council to spend all its available money on the individual library buildings and their staff and stock.
So such a platform might offer supply contracts for all the major suppliers, for library management system suppliers, for web services, RFID, for design contracts, for national catalogues, for distribution for inter library stock movement and so on.
They could include marketing and promotion, impact and performance measures, community communications and publisher promotions.
At the same time library staff could be trained to use these standard platforms however large or small theirn library might be.
If there were two or three across the whole country they would be competitive and efficient. Councils could use several for their different libraries if they wished.
I think we should develop such models commercially and role them out quickly. I believe they would reduce the cost of the service by £200-£300m. They also could remove the need for 'trusts' and would allow councils to remain directly accountable for the quality of their libraries. They could even be used by communities who wanted to run their own libraries or schools, hospitals, prisons, etc
As always I would propose that the national standards would be operated by BIC
Let us call them Perkins Platforms.
copyright: Tim Coates -2010
Posted by Perkins at 5:50 PM | Comments (1)
Durning Library under threat
From Isobel Durrant - Monday 20 September
"The Durning Library in Kennington, London SE11 is under threat. There's a meeting tonight at the Oval theatre.
I think the details are on the Kennington Association blog page.
This is in the London Borough of Lambeth"
Posted by Perkins at 9:06 AM | Comments (2)
September 9, 2010
Library Futures Programme
The challenge, that has been present over several years, has been to create a really efficient infrastructure nationally that allows individual local libraries to offer high quality individual local service. Of course each council can be responsible for the performance of their own libraries, but we don't then need 150 management operations of the kind that we have, at all.
The failure to solve all this that means that at the moment we really need it to work, it hardly exists. Nor is there any sign from those working on the Libraries Future programme, that they even understand the problem, let alone have solutions in progress. If we lose a lot of libraries, there is no doubt in my mind whose responsibility that will be, because there is no need for any reduction in the service to the public.
There is a big argument going on-- and there needs to be.
Posted by Perkins at 11:13 AM | Comments (9)
September 7, 2010
Another thank you
From Sarah Pearson
"At the start of the school holidays we visited Amesbury public library in Wiltshire. We wanted to know if it was possible to walk from there to Stonehenge. The lady who we asked was friendly and wonderfully helpful - even telling us where we could leave our car for the day without incurring charges.
A good example of how we use libraries but one which won't show up in the "number of items borrowed" statistics."
Posted by Perkins at 5:52 PM | Comments (0)
The purpose of libraries
From Gareth Osler
The title of this comment: "So I guess my message is that libraries have a purpose and a point. But I, for damn sure, could not begin to tell you what that should be. I just work here." http://lisnews.org/what_point_public_library
When I came into libraries 5 years ago as a library assistant, working all over Liverpool Libraries, at break times, and on public transport to the various libraries I worked in (usually a different library every day), I quite naturally read through all the books the library had (and a few more) on the subject of libraries. The history of the libraries, the why, what, how, of the libraries, the values of the libraries (the instruction book on how to use the libraries).
I found, and I think this is fair comment, that our understanding of libraries is fragmented into the individual perceptions of the various stakeholders, librarians themselves, users, political rational, unions, etc. We do normally understand values in terms of a context, and the breadth of the value of the library and contexts of the library are as broad as the books in them! At the end of the day I think the person who understands libraries will also understand culture.
Bob McKee in the recent BBC radio programme 'What's the Point of ...: Series 3: The Public Library.' http://bbc.in/d73LfS reminds us that a library service should be implemented with an ideology, there should be some theory. So what are the main library ideologies, theories? Historically, current thinking.
At this point in the history of the public library, librarians I think need to next consolidate an understanding from the somewhat fragmented nature of what we currently know of the libraries. It's a big subject, but would solve the problem highlighted in the quote opening this comment. It would also help staff to do their jobs more effectively, and should also have the knock on effect of raising the culture of our society (no mean achievement).
Posted by Perkins at 10:31 AM | Comments (6)
September 4, 2010
Reform and renew the public library 'profession'
Earlier this year the professional body of librarians embarked on an exercise to review the role they should play in the future. By that they meant what function should the professional body perform for and on behalf its members
But that is only the half the story. The professional body tells us that public libraries cannot perform properly and provide the service the public needs without them.
I believe that their review of the role they play in public libraries should have analysed what the public need and want from their libraries and what local councils, who are their employers, want and need. They are not a body in isolation.
Their analysis of both these things should have been widely published so that both councils and the public could have seen it and been asked to agree with it. The public need includes a clear statement of how much things cost and where financial priorities lie and where responsibility for improvement lies.
Until that work is done it is hard to accept that the professional body has a credible voice in saying how libraries should develop and improve. Their review was just internal administration.
Just to keep saying that the public library service suffers because it has fewer and fewer 'professional' librarians is hard to believe. What is the training that has allowed that title to be granted? Why are most of the people who staff libraries not trained in the same way? Is the qualification more valuable than experience? Does 'professional' equate to the standard of capable management required by those in senior positions? Is the professional presciption for libraries actually what the public choose to want? Is it what councils need to fulfill their obligations? These questions should be answered by public representatives, not just the members of the profession. Proper answers cannot be taken for granted in the way that the leaders of the profession appear to believe they should be.
If all was well with public libraries and they had clear purpose and were well used, one might assume there was no problem-- but that is not the case and the public is entitled to know more why the library profession claims credibility and even a public charter. From the public point of view the track record is not good. There apppears to be confusion of purpose; there are no accepted measures against which the public can judge performance and value, there is no clear voice. The profession has a habit of blaming both politicians and the public for not understanding or valuing them. That is their own problem and they should face it. Librarianship is honourable work: they should have a good story to tell.
It is the view of this blog that confusion about the public library profession is one of the largest problems of the public library service. Unless it is tackled quickly it will contribute to the collapse of the service that we appear to be facing.
Until this work is done it is wrong for ministers and departments to call upon the profession for their view in the manner that they have done in the past. The view has no public value until it is endorsed properly by the public.
In simple terms CILIP and the SCL should not be part of the governing body of the Libraries Future programme when at the same time that body has no local councillors and no representation of the public on it.
Posted by Perkins at 7:29 AM | Comments (9)
September 3, 2010
Library Supply
From James
"As a small publisher I can't understand why libraries can't deal with me direct. The situation today is that I have to sell to one of only two wholesalers, the wholesaler then sells to one of only two library supplier both operating from the same building in Lancashire, and then the library supplier sells to the librarian. Why? Is the library buying at a good price? Is the publisher getting a square deal? Is this long chain of supply really necessary?"
No, it's not, James.... and no one is doing anything to sort this out. Not only is the supply chain too long and expenisve, but it also means that publishers' books are not properly presented and marketed in public libraries-- which is the reason they look so dull.
Not only could we eliminate the transportation of the stock from wholesaler to library supplier, we could also cut the moves from library supplier to 150 council depots and from depot to individual library. The book could have simply gone from wholesaler to library building. The whole thing is as daft as brushes. And we worry about there not being enough money in the library service
Posted by Perkins at 11:26 AM | Comments (6)
September 1, 2010
Letter to Leaders of London councils
This letter was sent to most of the leaders of the London councils.
Dear Councillor
LLL is the representative body for public library user groups across the whole of London . As chair of LLL I am writing to you, as Leader of your council, in the matter of the forthcoming budget round.
Everybody recognises that councils have enormously difficult tasks in facing the budget pressures that arise from the national need to reduce the deficit of public expenditure over income. If proper priorities are established then the public library service makes no special pleading other than that which it merits by value of the service it provides to individuals and groups in communities. We believe that such value can be improved and have published a charter for how to do that, which I have attached. We look for and request your support and that of your council for the articles of that charter.
In the pursuit of the reduction of costs I want to make some specific requests, which are these
1. Please do not close libraries, reduce book funds or opening hours in community libraries, nor reduce the hours of front line library assistants
2. Please do not approve plans which will rely on untried volunteer schemes to operate the core work of the library service. There are none that are proven to be reliable.
3. Instead please look diligently for savings that can be made in the following areas in your own library service
- Bibliographic and cataloguing services, which nowadays can be provided free by suppliers
- Internal storage and stock distribution within the council when it can be provided at nil or reduced cost by suppliers
- Excessive senior and middle internal management costs in the library service
- Excessive administrative and office activities in the library service, of those not actually working permananently on opening hours rotas of libraries
- Library overhead and associated council overhead costs of any kind.
- Council support services
- Systems development work
4. Please examine these matters thoroughly within the activities of your own council before participating in schemes to share work with other councils. It is our belief that the removal of most of these activities I have listed will have little impact on the quality of service to the public and that they will yield savings far in excess of the targets that are needed and will indeed allow funds to be allocated to make improvements to front line services .
In addition to these requests, which we are making of each individual council, we make the further requests of all the London Boroughs collectively
1. Please adopt as a matter of urgency, standard and identical specifications for physical processing of library materials, systems and data interchange so that there is no longer a need for individual libraries or councils to operate or manage their own specifications for any of these things.
2. Please stop replicating further activities in councils which are of no benefit to the service given in individual libraries to the public. We believe that across London £50m per annum is wasted on needless library activity, which funds should be being used to make improvements
I request that you put both the matter of our Charter and our priorities for savings in front of your council and adopt these measures as soon as possible.
I would be grateful if you could arrange for this email to be acknowledged.
With kindest regards.
Tim Coates
Chair LLL.
Change is Overdue - a public charter for libraries
We are currently in a situation where two thirds of people in the UK read in their free time [1] yet only one third of the population visit libraries [2] .
Why is this the case when libraries offer 24 hr web services, are open to all and provide access, free of charge, to books and an array of other interesting reading materials? Either it is because a public library service is not relevant today or, the more likely, libraries are not meeting the needs and wants of their local communities.
For too long the public library service and its management has been unresponsive to and disconnected from users and potential users. The essential value of public libraries needs to be reinforced at both local and national level and a focused effort must be made to see libraries fulfil their role and maintain their relevance for generations to come.
1. Make the libraries local
Individual libraries, large and small, need to be empowered and resourced to meet the specific needs of their local communities. The individuality of each library cannot be overstated and libraries need the freedom to operate independently.
2. Increase opening hours
In today’s society it is unforgivable that some libraries close for lunch or on certain weekdays. Providing access to library services means opening libraries at times when the community wants them open – late closing and weekend opening should be the norm.
3. Improve library collections
Library collections, book stocks and other resources, have been neglected almost everywhere and they need to be restored, maintained and made accessible. This means increased funding for new stock, replacement stock and giving the public access to special collections.
4. Improve the library environment
All public libraries should be attractive and dignified places to visit and in which to read and study. They need to be kept clean, safe and smart. Standards of interior design need to be raised and building architecture used to best effect. Appropriate local events and activities are important.
5. Embrace technology
While books should remain the focus for libraries, computers and technology can enhance users’ experience. With this in mind, computers and all associated equipment needs to be in good working order and kept up to date. Internet-based services, available round the clock, add value for many users and should be extended and promoted.
6. Liberate the library staff
Service to the public should be of a high professional standard. All staff, long or short term, full time or temporary should be trained for the roles they undertake. Volunteers are welcome for many aspects of the service, but they cannot take the place of skilled librarians in provision of the day to day service to readers.
7.Collaborate and share best practice
Collaboration between neighbouring authorities will make limited resources go further and sharing best practice will mean all libraries are better able to meet users’ expectations. A range of funding sources is available and councils need to explore the options and consult people about proposed change.
8. Don’t waste money
Accurate, meaningful and consistent reporting of library budgets and expenditure will encourage accountability and openness and mean all budget discussions are grounded in facts.
9. Performance feedback
Performance reporting should be timely accurate and clear. Every month councils should report publicly the key usage figures for each library within their responsibility.
10. Engage individuals and communities
There needs to be a substantial genuine effort to build trust between councils, government bodies , library professionals and library users. Local councillors must all be fully and properly informed about library matters and libraries should actively work with their users in managing their libraries.
11. Don't close libraries
Of course sometimes building development means that libraries have to move; library services can be provided more efficiently in newer facilities; sometimes closures can be justified. However residents are distrustful of assurances of improvement and the onus is on councils to demonstrate the benefits of proposed changes before they are made. Savings from library closures will be tiny compared to the animosity generated among library users. Many library users belong to groups sometimes marginalized by society—the elderly, the unemployed, single-parent families—and the negative impact on these people’s lives following library closures can outweigh any cost savings.
12. Make and keep a promise
Public library users call upon councils to commit themselves to achieving the aims of this charter.
[1] Source: Social Trends 39, ONS, 2009
[2] Source: Taking Part, DCMS, 2010
Posted by Perkins at 8:15 AM | Comments (3)