A Case Study of the
Reorganization of the Libraries at
Oxford University
UISK, Charles University
Prague
9 March 2006
Academic Libraries are
Experimenting with New Structures
•
•
•
•
Centralized or decentralized
Many new types of positions
Still usually hierarchical structure
Different Configurations—mergers with
computer centers or public libraries
th
400
September 2002—The
Anniversary Celebration of the
Bodleian Library At Oxford
•
Bodleian Library is the largest
and best known library at Oxford
Over the past nine years it and most of the
other libraries at Oxford have been
undergoing a process of integration and
reorganization
This restructuring mirrors that
done in many other types of
organizations as a result of:
•
•
•
•
Reduced budgets
Increased use of automation
Changing expectations of users
Increasing importance of digital materials
Began to study the integration
process in January 1997.
• Made six trips to Oxford and interviewed
most of the key players
• Read documents including public
documents, committee minutes, and memos
• Used email to communicate between visits
• Outsider to process-provided objectivity
• Limitations
Oxford Today
•
•
•
•
39 colleges
16,000 students
25% of students are international
130 nationalities represented
Oxford University
• The University and the colleges work
together. The colleges
–
–
–
–
–
Admit their own students
Provide the bulk of the instruction
Provide living and dining spaces
Provide common rooms and sports facilities
And each has its own library
The University
• Provides the framework within which the
college teaching takes place. The university
–
–
–
–
Determines the content of the courses
Sets examinations
Awards degrees
Provides a wide range of resources for teaching
and learning such as laboratories, museums and
libraries.
Oxford Libraries—Past and Present
• Many College Libraries are older than the
University’s libraries
The Beginning of a Central
University Library
In the 1430s, Duke Humfrey endowed the
university with his collection of books and
gave money for a room to be built above the
Divinity School.
Duke Humfrey’s Library
Sir Thomas Bodley
Bodley provided the library with:
•
•
•
•
•
Books
An endowment
A large number of benefactors
Its first librarian, Thomas James
An agreement with the Stationers’ Company
in 1610 making it the first deposit library in
Great Britain
• A set of rules that still affect the library
Before the reorganization the Oxford
library system was made up of over
100 autonomous libraries:
•
•
•
•
•
The Bodleian and its dependent libraries
The 39 College Libraries
The Departmental Libraries
The Faculty Libraries
The Ashmolean, Taylorean, etc.
Why the need to change?
Oxford had an extremely rich and diverse library
service provided by over one hundred libraries
• Too many autonomous libraries
• Too little space
• Too much duplication
• Many small library were expensive to maintain
• Need for pan-university services such as
preservation, automation, staff development and
information technology
• University itself is trying to streamline
The need for integration had been
apparent for a long time:
•
•
•
•
Shackleton Report (1966)
Nicholas Report (1987)
Thomas Report ( 1995)
Kenny Report (1995)
The Challenge Confronting the
Libraries was:
How can a group of libraries, most all with
long-standing histories and traditions, be
integrated into a single system? How can
the appropriate balance between the past
and the present be achieved?
The libraries were tied together
by their shared cataloging system
• OLIS brought in a union catalog, central
authority control, and training
• People in diverse libraries across the
university became accustomed to working
together on committees, etc.
• Automation began to break down the
isolation among the Oxford libraries
Rivalry between the Bodleian and
other libraries on campus based on:
• Size
• Prestige
• Different funding authorities and governing
bodies
• Different populations of users
• Different attitudes towards service to users
– Circulation
– Photocopying
As a result of the Thomas and
Kenney Reports
The job description for the post set up clearly the
expectations for the new librarian
“Following Consultation after publication of the various
reports, the University has decided to establish the new,
very senior library appointment and to charge its holder
with the task, amongst other duties, of submitting within
three years details proposals for creating an integrated
library system for the University under the direction of
the new officer.”
( From position advertisement of Director of University Library
Services and Bodley's Librarian: Further Particulars)
Reg Carr is hired as Director of
University Library Services and
Bodley’s Librarian
Arrived in Oxford in
January 1997.
Came from University of
Leeds where he had
been library director
for 10 years
Hired with the mandate “remit”
to bring a plan for an integrated
library within three years
• Advantages
• Disadvantages
What libraries were to be
included in the “integrated
system?”
• The Bodleian and its dependents
• The faculty libraries
• The Ashmolean, Taylorean,
• Not included were:
– The college libraries
– The departmental libraries
Steps on the way to an integrated
library
• Framework for the Millennium (1998)
• Bodleian Library Staff Newsletter became the
Oxford University Staff Newsletter and then
Outline.
• On February 8, 2000, Congregation approved the
Library’s Committee proposals for integration
• Integration formally began in Autumn of 2000—
Libraries Committee replaced by Curators of the
University Libraries.
The Path toward Integration
• Very difficult
• Problems with communication—what
employees wanted to hear was impossible
to say
• Problems with participation in planning
• Organizational inertia—both in the
University and the Libraries
A new type of director
The “invisible” director-Wasn’t seen in the
canteen or around the library
Tensions between internal and external
management duties
President of RLG—many trips to the US for
RLG meetings and to fund-raise
Criticized for
•Not being a scholar
•Being an outsider
•Being too much of a modern manager
“Users” instead of “readers”
“ Human Resources” instead of “staff”
Difficulty of change for the staff
• Great loyalty to their own “part” of the library
• Suspicion that other “parts” were being listened to
more
• Dealing with a “legacy” system that had been in
place for hundreds of years
• Oxford as a university has not been receptive to
change
• Many had never worked elsewhere—cosmopolitan
vs. locals
The formal integration process is
completed
but
is it a success?
How is success be measured?
According to the Thomas report of 1995 the
guiding principle of the integration is: "any
changes that might be proposed must have
as their prime justification the improvement
of the overall service provided to users of
Oxford's libraries. Altering existing
arrangements solely for the sake of
administrative tidiness cannot be justified if
it results in a less satisfactory service."
Is it better for the Libraries’
Users?
Hard to judge because the integration effort
was accompanied by a general cutback in
funding across the university
Difficult to tease out the impact
of integration from other
confounding factors in measuring
satisfaction for users.
Some costly missteps affected the
integration process
• Automated Stack System inoperable at
first
• Visitor’s Centre Plan--”The Oxford Theme
Park” – created huge opposition and
diverted attention from the integration plan
• Lack of space has forced library units to
move to outlying areas
A review process was built into
the original planning and the
report of the review committee
was issued in 2003
What were the results?
The review found overwhelming
positive support for the principle
of integration
Service to readers has improved
• Opening of some libraries on Sundays
before exams
• Common photocopying card
• Much appreciated automated stack request
• Closer involvement with users
• Greater availability of electronic resources
However, “the integration
process has not been without its
difficulties. ”
• Individual libraries had been used to being
“independent”
• Staff resistance to change
• Pressures that have arisen from “wider
organisational and financial contexts”
• But further integration is recommended
Impact on Library Staff
•
•
•
•
Change is difficult
Morale is low
Fewer numbers mean more work to be done
Many key staff members have either retired
or gone to other positions
There was more optimism on my last visit
• Less animosity towards the director
• More flexibility in staffing
• More libraries have joined and all of the
departmental will be part of system within next
few year
• Plans to consolidate some of the smaller units
• More acceptance of the unified system
• Discussion of renaming the system the Bodleian
Oxford University Library system
The Transformed Libraries at Oxford
• OULS is now is largest integrated library system
in the UK and among the largest of any in the
world
• 38 libraries, and its holding of more than 11
million printed items.
• A staff of over 660 and an annual budget of more
than 25 million pounds.
• Although there are still 42 departments
maintaining their own libraries outside of OULS,
the libraries within the system represent more 96%
of the university’s budget for libraries..
Almost seven hundred years after the
founding of the first library intended for the
entire University, Oxford now has a
centralized system of libraries that should
position it well to meet the information
needs of its faculty and students
What Next?
• Long range effects of this process are still
not known although the outlook appears to
be good
• New staff members will arrive
• How long will the memory of the
“integration” process remain?
• Next phase of research
The End