ACQNET v5n021 (June 18, 1995) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/serials/stacks/acqnet/acqnet-v5n021 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 5, No. 21, June 18, 1995 ======================================== (1) FROM: Peter Stevens SUBJECT: Feather River Report PART II (157 lines) ________________________________________________________________ Date: Tue, 06 Jun 1995 13:58:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Peter Stevens (Univ. of Washington) Subject: FEATHER RIVER REPORT: PART II Saturday, May 20, 1995: "Reorganization Revisited: Acquisitions as an Endangered Species" Eleanor Cook (Appalachian State Univ.) cookei@appstate.edu At Appalachian State, library reorganization left technical services without an assistant director in charge of these activities and with only a half-time supervisor proposed. A combined unit was formed by the merger of acquisitions, cataloging, serials and part of collection development, called Materials Processing. With a great deal of staff involvement, the library was completely reshaped to a new model, with a new mission, at the same time that a new online system was being implemented. The new organizational model is characterized by cross-functional teams, some organized by subject area, with all librarians involved in faculty liaison and selection. Instead of department heads, activities are supervised by coordinators. These coordinators all report to a single associate director. While acquisitions librarians are not endangered in this model, they are being crossbred and involved in a wider range of activities than in the traditional model. Likewise, technical services staff now perform a wider range of duties, with staff having had an opportunity to indicate which activities interested them most. "Sleeping With the Enemy: The Love/Hate Relationship between Acquisitions and Collection Development" Karen Cargille (UC-San Diego) kcargille@ucsd.edu AND: Douglas Cargille (CSU-San Diego) cargill@mail.sdsu.edu This husband-wife team, in point-counterpoint fashion, enumerated the contrasting viewpoints and values of acquisitions and collection development librarians (based on their personal experiences). They stressed the need for these 2 parties to take the time to communicate face-to-face and frequently, and to define the boundaries of each other's responsibilities. Collection development librarians are responsible for keeping faculty out of the library director's office and for communicating with faculty. Acquisitions librarians are responsible for the speedy and efficient acquisition of library materials but have little face-to-face contact with library users. By working on their relationship, acquisitions and collection development librarians can help each other achieve their own and their library's goals. "I Love Me, I Love Not: Schizophrenic Behavior among Acquisitions/Collection Development Librarians" Terry Allison (CSU-San Marcos) terry_allison@csusm.edu This presentation reflected the speaker's graduate studies in postmodern analysis and deconstructive theory, inviting attendees to consider all the roles that they fulfill in their daily work and how poorly their job titles reflect the great multiplicity of those roles. By deconstructing their job titles, acquisitions and collection development librarians can gain greater understanding about the variety of functions that they handle and can think in a much broader way. "The Acquisitions Manager: Where is the Librarian in this Picture?" Kirk Russell (Brigham Young University) kirk_russell@byu.edu Acquisitions librarianship is sometimes seen as a stepping stone to positions with a more strictly-professional focus, as more of a business office function than one that demands considerable professional expertise. Instead, acquisitions librarianship uniquely requires both professional and business expertise. Because acquisitions librarianship is largely ignored in library education, many professionals have little understanding of what this specialized field entails and what its practitioners do. Unlike other library departments, acquisitions operations usually employ just a few professionals, who can easily become isolated within the larger library organization. With one foot in the library and the other in the business world, acquisitions librarians rely on their colleagues at other institutions for advice, rather than on librarians within their own libraries. Acquisitions librarianship is undergoing rapid change, with outside forces defining many of these changes. Integrated online systems require acquisitions librarians to become much more knowledgeable about cataloging, accounting, collection development, and automation. The book and serial vendors with whom acquisitions staff works are moving into many new services and automated products. Many more materials are now available in electronic and other, non-traditional formats that have different acquisitions requirements (such as site licensing). Acquisitions management is changing as the number of professionals in technical services shrinks and as training and teaching of more students and part-time assistants increases. Acquisitions librarians need to change the perception their library colleagues have of them and engage more widely in the larger profession. ETHICS: More Case Studies in Collections and Acquisitions Ron Ray (University of the Pacific) rray@uop.edu AND: Mary Devlin (Blackwell) devlin@bnamf.blackwell.com AND: Meta Nissley (CSU-Chico) meta_nissley@msmailgw.csuchico.edu Ron Ray was the first presenter in this session. He discussed a situation where one library publisher's advertised subscription rates for their journals routinely fell well below what libraries actually paid for these subscriptions over a period of years. After comparing usage data for these publications, many were cancelled at his library. The ethical question was whether this publisher was intentionally trying to mislead subscribers about the actual annual cost of their publications. Mary Devlin offered the case of a vendor whose employee knows that bad business practices are likely to bankrupt the company. What responsibility does that employee have, to the company and to its customers, to inform management that the business is in jeopardy? Meta Nissley's case involved the ethics involved when a document delivery company offers a hot new service, widely, to a library and its users, for free--but, then, on short notice, levies a fee for every transaction. The resulting fees can amount to very large expenditures. Does this action represent an unethical bait and switch operation? These cases provoked much discussion, as intended. "Library Management: The Latest Fad, A Dismal Science, or Just Plain Work?" Bill Fisher (San Jose State Univ.) fisher@sjsuvm1.sjsu.edu In this presentation, the speaker modestly attempted to summarize the entire history of management to the present day, neatly encapsulating the major management theorists of each major period of management theory, from Weber, through Taylor, Fayol, MacGregor, to Ouchi, Peters and Waterman, and Senge, ending up with Martin Smith's book on management fads and fashions (entitled _Contrarian Management_). Management theories have evolved as objectives, technology and the work force have changed. What remains is the need for managers to develop positive relationships with work groups as well as with individual workers, aiming for commitment rather than compliance. While management involves much hard work, the best managers succeed in making it look easy and effortless. Management was likened to conducting a symphony orchestra, where each instrumental group must meld and every instrument must be in tune. DEBATE: Consolidation of Purchases with a Single Vendor Makes Good Business Sense. Arguing FOR the proposition were Joyce Ogburn (Yale), Sharon Propas (Stanford) and Barbara Woodford (Ebsco). They cited the simplicity of dealing with just one vendor, lower costs, better discount, simpler management, streamlined procedures, better ILS linkage and a more attractive prospect for other vendors (if successful in obtaining that single-vendor position). Arguing AGAINST the proposition were Joe Barker (UC-Berkeley), Anne McKee (Faxon) and Peter Stevens (Univ. of Washington). They argued against putting all one's eggs in a single basket, preferring the advantages of greater competition for discounts and services with a range of vendors. They argued that no one vendor could supply all materials; and that the number of vendor dinners at ALA would be reduced if orders were consolidated. :) ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 5, No. 21 ****** END OF FILE ******