Memorandum submitted by the Laser Foundation
INTRODUCTION
The Laser Foundation is a grant making Foundation
set up in 2001 to support research, development, advocacy, publications
and discussion, and to fund projects that support the end users
of public libraries and the development of the public library
sector. It was the successor to the highly successful LASER (London
and South Eastern Library Region), that had run library services
and a strong research programme since the 1930s.
The Foundation is managed by a Board of Trustees
representing the public and academic library sector, research,
consultancy, publishing, bookselling and authors, and the professional
and specialist bodies within the sector. A list of Trustees and
Patrons is attached.
Since it started its work in late 2001 it has
produced and initiated a wide range of high profile reports and
research activities. These include:-
— Overdue: How to create a modern
public library service, by Charles Leadbetter. Published in
April 2003, funded by the Laser Foundation under its directorship,
and published by Demos.
— Who's in Charge, by Tim Coates.
Published in 2004 and funded by the Laser Foundation. The work
was based on evidence provided by Hampshire County Library, the
Head of Libraries being a Trustee of the Foundation.
— Value and Impact of Public Libraries.
Work in progress being undertaken with funding from the Laser
Foundation, on developing robust methodologies to measure the
real impact being made by public libraries in the communities
they serve and contributing to the shared priorities of the local
authority, this work is due for completion in Spring 2005, and
involves eight pilot public library authorities.
— One of our major current initiatives
involves working with a team of middle to senior young managers
of public libraries in producing a vision for the future of the
public library service, (Public Libraries: A Vision, in future
referred to as PLAV) which will build on Framework for the
Future.
In addition, and by way of example, the Foundation
has funded a number of research projects on e-books, location
of manuscripts in public libraries, and a project based at The
University of London (Senate House) Library, on Archival Sources
especially for family and local history, with access for users
of public libraries. It has also funded user surveys and access
via public libraries to local newspapers, and has supported public
libraries in implementing the Disability Discrimination Act. It
is currently in discussions regarding funding a sensory library
for children and young people with a range of disabilities, within
a public library in the North of England.
The Foundation works closely with a range of
people and organizations, including the DCMS, MLA, Society of
Chief Librarians (SCL), The Paul Hamlyn Foundation (PHF), Audit
Commission, British Library, The Chartered Institute of Library
and Information Professionals (CILIP), The Society of Authors
and the Social Exclusion Network etc.
Our latest Call document outlines the areas
we are interested in and prepared to fund.
COMMENTS ON
THE ISSUES
IDENTIFIED BY
THE INQUIRY
TEAM
Communities and society are changing and there
is evidence that the appeal of public libraries has diminished
for certain sectors of the community. Although visits have increased
with the introduction of the People's Network, these visits, in
a high percentage of cases, are limited to use of email, with
no use of the library's other services. Certain age groups are
not using the library, and for some minority ethnic groups libraries
are not on their agenda.
The PLAV report referred to above is
addressing many issues, and some of the causes currently affecting
public libraries, the causes and solutions discussed include:
— Quality of stock (depth of available
stock, currency, cleanliness, presentation).
— Availability of stock (quicker access
and more copies of latest books).
— Value added services (premium services
for those who can and will pay).
— Quick access to stock (home delivery,
returns boxes, drive through collection, email requests, JIT (Just
in Time access and delivery).
— Levels of Bureaucracy, for example,
the current emphasis on confirming the personal identities of
users, which poses such questions as: what does library membership
mean, and why isn't everyone a member automatically on birth?
— Services and appropriate space for
young people (chill out rooms, teenage web pages etc).
— Location, style and attractiveness
of buildings. Are they where they need to be? Are they inviting?
Are they open when people need them rather than the hours they
have always been open? Are they:—Open before school, after
work, on Sundays, and on Bank Holidays?
Many libraries do offer a range of interesting
and exciting opportunities, relevant for many of the issues above,
such as teenage services, homework clubs, reading clubs etc.,
but not all do so, and funding of these services can be short
term, limited and ad hoc. There is no universal pattern, and for
many the library is not considered as an option or choice. People
today have many other alternatives to using the public library,
such as magazines, DVD, sports clubs and the gym, TV, holidays
and nightclubs. Libraries also face competition for the provision
of traditional services eg from reading clubs, bookshops, the
BBC and local voluntary groups.
What can be done to increase use? Address some
of the issues already identified: improve, refurbish or close
some branch libraries, put others in places where communities
are now located., reduce the fragmentation of libraries brought
about by there being c150 different local authorities running
them, introduce a common approach to marketing and brand identification.
The logo for all public libraries should be common, clearly visible
and well known., as quickly and easily identified and seen as
the McDonald's sign.
Consult with the communities being served, using
a flexible approach with review on a regular basis, to redefine
and update libraries' role in today's society. Tailor services
to meet the community's needs and interests. Provide core funding
for core activities, not subject to the vagaries of local authority
funding Provide more money for books and for redevelopment. (In
Overdue, noted above, Charlie Leadbetter suggested a National
Library Development Agency be set up to support and fund the public
library sector and to implement the development and change required,
and that this process would take five years).
Assist innovation in libraries. Libraries often
work on a small scale, their parent authorities or departments
being small. They do not have the staff resource and time to develop
ideas and sustain them. There is too much short term development
based on short term funding which then is removed, with the result
that the service cannot be sustained.
More consultation with the communities being
served, and flexible approaches which are reviewed on a regular
basis. Public libraries are the M & S or Sainsbury's of the
culture world at the moment, out of step and out of tune with
many of society's needs and preferences, still serving the users
of days gone by, and trying to define their role in today's society.
There is more on these topics in Overdue and
PLAV.
Most public librarians report that their level
of funding and the number of books they can purchase for those
funds is lower than 20 years ago.
The initial funding of the People's Network
will shortly come to an end. The equipment already installed is
rapidly becoming obsolete. The services on the Network are not
populated with universally available services. The cost of sustaining
the network and the equipment is emerging as a major problem for
libraries, charging for access in order to sustain the service,
is a significant issue.
Assignment of responsibility for some services
to a central agency where economy of scale could be achieved would
be possible if there was a National Library Development Agency
(as recommended in Overdue). Commercial vendors could then negotiate
with one organisation acting on behalf of all public libraries.
The regulations which apply to public libraries, just like any
other part of a local authority, prevent them taking advantage
of the many economies of scale etc, available to academic libraries,
such as licensing agreements for software, negotiating deals for
hardware and maintenance etc.
Much information provided on the internet is
free at the point of use; other information comes from sources
where cooperation on purchase and deals between all libraries
would reduce costs. Major print sources need to be purchased from
the limited book fund. More use of electronic links between public
libraries, other libraries and some agencies for information sources
would bring benefits. Consortia purchase of services which would
appeal to public library users, such as Classical Dot Com, would
be favourably negotiated by the suggested National Library development
Agency. A major national strategy, as has been developed for academic
libraries, would be beneficial.
The establishment of most kinds of business
requires an analysis of the of the population served, a search
for best location, a calculation of break even figures, a measure
of demand for the service, and an investigation of demand broken
down by client group etc. The same needs to apply to all aspects
of the public library service, many of which are located where
they have always been, and many where the population they serve
has changed in many aspects.
For example, if a library is within an area
where there is high unemployment, low salary levels, minority
ethnic groups, low levels of basic skills, the services, opening
hours, stock and location of the library would be based on that
information. Likewise if the population served is high income,
professional couples, the services would reflect that, and the
stock would reflect those interests. Likewise consultation and
marketing would reflect what is required. Most libraries have
by now adopted policies on social exclusion, a lot of good work
is continuing in this area.
— Legislative structure
The present structure works against the best
interest of public libraries. There are three bodies which exercise
some control and influence over public libraries, in addition
to the local authority in which they are situated, namely DCMS,
ODPM and MLA. This structure does not make for clarity in policy,
decision making, funding and accountability. Many organisations
have complained in the past that it is impossible to do business,
offer services or discuss issues with the public library sector,
as there are c150 of them to separately negotiate with. If libraries
were the responsibility of a single department or agency, the
structure would be simpler, and progress speedier. It is also
unclear whether public libraries are "culture" or "education",
or both, as policy changes from time to time. So often major government
initiatives exclude public libraries either all together, or until
the librarians spot the omission and fight for a place at the
table. A recent example being a Home Office report on Parenting
Skills, which omitted any mention of libraries, the stock they
have on the topic and the services they offer, even though libraries
know well that mothers and children are an important part of their
clientele, and there are many more examples. In fact the very
first major report on what was then called the Superhighway, totally
omitted any reference to public libraries, and made one brief
reference only to the British Library!
— Recruitment and Training
For public libraries both are an issue. Public
libraries are not the most popular branch of the profession, pay
is low by some standards, and working in a local authority lacks
many attractions. The skills required to address public library
challenges are changing. The new skills required are not necessarily
on the traditional library school curriculum nor is in-service
training provision always entirely appropriate. However, much
is being done and the future will require and will see a different
breed of librarian. Skills such as management, (especially change
management), marketing, advocacy, budgeting, political skills,
presentation and lobbying skills are all required; much of this
is addressed in the PLAV and Overdue Reports already mentioned.
Links between public libraries and other libraries
and other bodies do exist, but these vary across the country.
Many links reflect the educational role in libraries in areas
such as basic skills and e-learning, and many libraries are Learndirect
centres. However, links tend to be developed locally and for organisations
like Ufi/Learndirect this is cumbersome and time consuming, negotiating
with each individual authority. Links between academic and public
libraries also exist, again in different forms across the country.
The main cooperative activity being the inter-library lending
system between the British Library, academic libraries and public
libraries. However the amount of resource sharing between public
libraries in particular is adversely affected by the lack of a
single automated inter-library loan system across the UK, which
would maximise resource sharing and brings the economies of scale
required.
The British library is doing considerable work
to make its services available to the regions, and this is to
be commended.
Again if other major organisations could deal
with one body that represents public libraries, progress would
be greater.
Generally the work of public libraries with
real and effective partners remains underdeveloped and unimaginative.
Libraries tend to seek partnership with the same limited range
and number of other organisations, and not with the major industries
and organisations. Partnerships usually are limited to Memorandum
of Understanding rather than true partnership agreements. The
range and type of partnerships need attention, looking for more
innovative partners and partnership programmes, using commercial
firms, big conglomerates, seeking inventive sponsorship etc.,
the skills to do this are underdeveloped. However, to succeed
public libraries need to be able to articulate what they can offer
and bring to the table, and partners need to be able to negotiate
with a central agency and not each individual public library.
There are however some good examples of where libraries are working
well in partnership, a recent one being the LearnEast project,
co-funded by the ESF Equal programme. Such projects deserve significant
publicity as best practice examples.
The People's Network is a success story by any
standard, but it took many years to achieve and in so doing it
lost the upper hand in populating and controlling the content
and access to it. The major drawbacks now are the sustainability,
maintenance and renewal, funding and free access, and networking
services to all libraries. A National Library Development Agency
could assist by removing layers of bureaucracy and duplication
of effort. The foothold won by the People's Network needs to be
defended, but there is also a need to add value to retain those
users of the network in the public library, as the increase in
home access to broadband becomes more significant.
Any new library has to take account of "Googleism",
ie how people access and use the Internet, the effect that it
has on the library, in use of the library, perception of the library,
how the library should be managed, organised and developed. Again
Overdue and Futures refer to these aspects. An approach to all
this can be seen in a recent American Library organisation (OCLC)
report, which is an environmental scan of libraries in the USA.
http://www.oclc.org/membership/escan/default.htm
The Committee would benefit by reading this,
as a similar research exercise on UK public libraries would do
much to assist forward planning.
One area the Laser Foundation is interested
in pursuing is how libraries can be helped to improve their abilities
to be innovative. By this we mean having the ability, space, time
and resource to pursue ideas, to develop them, to seek partners
and sponsorship, to make successful bids for funding and to promote
and seek support for their services, and to manage the substantial
changes known to be required.
CONCLUDING COMMENTS
The Laser Foundation is committed to the cause
of public libraries, and is putting its money where its mouth
is. It sees much good work across the sector, much hard work and
dedication, but also major problems and obstacles, many of which
we have highlighted above.
Members of the Laser Foundation Board would
be happy to give evidence to the Committee in the sincere hope
that the Committee will be able to take note of the submissions
and begin to make a real difference to the sector.
9 November 2004
|
