• Publications
  • > 1994
    • > M3/93

M3/93 Fielden Report

Supporting Expansion

A Report on Human Resource Management in Academic Libraries, for the Joint Funding Councils' Libraries Review Group

July 1993 (Revised September 1993)

Executive Summary

What is Happening Now?

1.Our discussions and responses to the LISU questionnaire suggest that 
the key features of the present situation in academic libraries are as 
follows:

significant increases in the numbers of readers, the frequency of their 
use of the library, and in demands made of Library and Information 
Service (LIS) staff for help (paragraphs 2.2 - 2.4)

some increases in opening hours since 1986/87 with an average of 65 hours 
per week of lending availability (paragraph 2.5)

widespread development of campus-wide networks, allowing access to 
catalogues, reservations etc; in a few cases networked terminals are 
placed on desks in learning resource centres (paragraphs 2.9 - 2.12)

a growth in staff numbers since 1986/87, principally in the area of 'non 
professionals', but at a far lower rate than the growth in 
readers/customers. There are now at least 7800 people working in academic 
libraries (paragraphs 2.13 - 2.20)

fewer books being bought by students and a growth in the demand for 
multiple copies due to modularisation and other changes in teaching 
methods (paragraph 2.23)

convergence between the library and computing services which is of two 
kinds: organisational and operational convergence. In the former case 
structural change rarely goes below the third tier and operational 
practices do not necessarily alter; in the latter the information and 
library services come together in day to day operations (paragraphs 2.25 
- 2.27)

operational convergence is common in strategic planning and network 
management, but rare in joint staffing of help desks or joint provision 
of training for students (paragraphs 2.28 - 2.30)

some use of open learning materials and very significant changes in other 
teaching/learning methods with growing use of project work; these change 
the way students use resources and lead to library staff being asked more 
questions which require pedagogical or subject knowledge (paragraphs 2.38 
- 2.42) 

ready acceptance of the customer service philosophy by LIS staff, 
including some use of service level agreements with academic departments, 
but this still has to be universally applied (paragraphs 2.48 - 2.50)

cataloguing, and in some cases classification, is being undertaken by 
staff paid on support/clerical scales who are also taking on more of the 
enquiry desk functions (paragraph 2.52)

Assumptions about Future Change

2.A study of the North American and Australian literature revealed a 
remarkably similar set of circumstances to the UK in both cases. The US 
has many campuses much better equipped electronically and with more 
advanced research projects. The distinction between universities with a 
'holdings' policy and those with an 'access' policy seems well accepted 
(paragraphs 3.4 and 3.5)

3.Our assumptions about change to the year 2000 are:
that all institutions will move to greater operational convergence 
between their library and information services (paragraph 3.12)

that access to networked terminals will be universal (often within 
learning resource centres), as will reliance on 
CD-ROMs and BIDS-type services for delivery of bibliographic data and 
text (paragraph 3.12)

the roles of staff will alter with those currently labelled 
'professional' playing a greater role in learner support and academic 
liaison while other staff provide the technical support and enquiry 
services (paragraph 3.12)

4.We propose a framework for analysing the different types of learner 
support which LIS staff are expected to provide (paragraphs 3.18 - 3.23)

5.The three roles which will change most are those of the senior 
manager, the subject (or information) librarian and the library 
assistant. We describe the likely changes (paragraphs 3.24 - 3.30)

6.Although many libraries produce strategic plans, these do not always 
integrate with the university's strategy or answer fully questions about 
the role of the library. Equally, they rarely include consideration of 
the human resource implications of the strategy. (paragraphs 3.31 - 3.34)

Human Resource Management

7.Two national systems of grades and conditions of service are 
operating with considerable local variations. In the old universities 
some so-called 'professional' staff are on contracts which are almost 
identical to those of academic staff, while many graduate staff are 
labelled 'non professional' and are on clerical grades: in the new 
universities there is a confused picture with senior staff on individual 
contracts, or classed as academic, or on APT&C grades (paragraphs 4.3 - 
4.8)

8.We believe that it will be essential to have very flexible working 
arrangements if LIS staff are to provide the services their customers 
need. This is not possible under the present system in many cases in the 
old universities, which often creates artificial boundaries and a 'them 
and us' attitude between grades of staff. It also acts as a block on the 
promotion of some able 'non professionals' (paragraph 4.20)

9.There are four areas where staff will need strengthened skills and 
understanding: subject librarians will have to understand 
teaching/learning skills if they begin to fulfil para-academic functions; 
almost universally, staff must know how to access/navigate in electronic 
databases; customer care and service attitudes have to be widely applied 
and new forms of team working are needed to help to build commitment to 
the basic goals of each LIS (paragraph 4.13)

10.Library schools and academic library employers do not seem to be 
working closely together at national level and many of the changes 
pending will have curricular implications (paragraph 4.14)

11.We reviewed the arguments for a "new blood scheme" to help to inject 
new people and ideas into some institutions. We feel that central funding 
is not justified, since so many institutions have already taken 
managerial action to solve such problems on their own (paragraphs 4.17 - 
4.18)

12.We are recommending the abolition of the term 'professional', when 
used to describe a grade of staff, and the investigation, through some 
pilot studies, of the potential for implementing an integrated grading 
system for all LIS staff in universities (paragraphs 4.21 - 4.23)

13.Very few universities had staff appraisal schemes in operation for 
'non professional' or ancillary staff (paragraphs 4.25 - 4.28)

14.The scale and type of training provided varies widely, as does the 
expenditure on it in time and money (a range from 2% to 12% of salary 
cost). In particular, management training is undeveloped and there is a 
need for much more training in the use of information systems and 
electronic databases (paragraphs 4.29 - 4.39)

15.The content and use of National Vocational Qualifications were 
poorly understood by senior LIS staff. To some extent this is explained 
by the early stage of the ILS Lead Body's work, but there is a real risk 
that the academic libraries' distinctive needs will not be fully 
reflected in the national competences and standards. The work of some 
other Lead Bodies (Administration for administration and accounting 
standards, Training and Development, and Personnel) will also be relevant 
to some LIS staff. As yet, however, there is no Lead Body which can help 
to develop the skills needed for the tutorial support role (paragraphs 
4.48 to 4.55)

16.There are some concerns in the community about what is feared to be 
an over-prescriptive methodology for applying NVQs, the bureaucratic 
language and the potential high cost in time and outlays (paragraph 4.58)

Conclusions, dissemination strategy and recommendations

17.The scale of the many changes taking place in an already very varied 
population makes it hard to produce recommendations that fit every 
institution. In practice, therefore, we are urging all to follow the best 
practice of the few. The major changes we expect are in the roles of the 
subject librarian and the library assistant (paragraphs 5.2 - 5.3)

18.Our recommendations are grouped for three particular audiences: 
individual institutions, CVCP and SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG and the Funding 
Councils.

For institutions:

(a)All heads of LIS should work closely within the senior management of 
their institution to prepare strategic plans which define clearly 1
the role of the service and its interaction with the institution's IS 
strategies (paragraph 3.32) 

(b)When universities prepare strategic plans for their LIS, they should 
also consciously plan for the people who will put the plans into effect 
(paragraph 3.33)

(c)Such plans should review the changing roles of LIS staff and, where 
there is an extension of the learner support role, the boundaries of LIS 
responsibility should be agreed with the relevant academic person 
responsible (paragraph 3.33)

(d)Staff appraisal schemes should be extended to cover all staff in 
library/information services, where this is not currently the case 
(paragraph 4.27)

(e)The effectiveness of staff appraisal schemes should be reviewed at 
three yearly intervals (paragraph 4.28)

(f)LIS should nominate a senior member of staff to have formal 
responsibility for staff training and development and, where there is 
currently no formal statement of staff development and training policy, 
one should be introduced as soon as possible (paragraph 4.37)

(g)Institutions should aim to allocate a minimum of 5% of LIS staff 
time to training and development (paragraph 4.44)

For CVCP and SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG

(h)SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG should review the initial training needs of LIS 
staff and hold formal discussions with BAILER, building on the detailed 
operational links that exist (paragraph 4.14)

(i)SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG and other relevant bodies should consider how to 
produce guides to good practice in staff development and also how to 
achieve greater 
co-ordination in the provision of training and development for all LIS 
staff (paragraph 4.37)

(j)The three organisations should meet with CVCP at the earliest 
opportunity to decide how to play a more proactive role, within the 
Library Association framework, in the development and application of NVQs 
for LIS (paragraph 4.55)

(k)In due course SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG should develop mechanisms to review 
the institutional experiences in implementing NVQs and to disseminate 
information from these reviews (paragraph 4.60)

For the Funding Councils

(l)After consultation with CVCP and PCEF, and in conjunction with other 
related studies, the Councils should consider commissioning a number of 
pilot job evaluation studies in LIS in order to explore the introduction 
of an integrated grading system to remove the barriers to promotion and 
flexible movement between the different grades of staff (paragraph 4.23)

(m)The Councils should consider establishing an LIS Innovation Fund 
which would for three years pump prime projects in three areas:

pilot management training programmes for the chief librarians and heads 
of service and for those at deputy or equivalent level with large staff 
management responsibilities

the development and production of open learning training materials for 
use in-house by LIS staff

short term support for innovative staff posts created to serve either one 
or a group of institutions
For all three purposes a sum of  1 million per annum is 
suggested for three years (paragraphs 4.19, 4.41, 4.43 
and 4.46)

(n)Once Lead Body standards are available, the Funding Councils might, 
if appropriate, fund four demonstration projects to ensure that the 
quality of LIS services is strengthened by the use of NVQs in staff 
development (paragraph 4.59)

(o)The Councils should work closely with the CVCP on a programme for 
disseminating the recommendations of this report with particular 
reference to the quality of institutional management of LIS (paragraph 
5.7).

Introduction

1.1This study forms part of the Libraries Review being managed by the 
HEFCE and directed by a Review Group, containing representatives of the 
Scottish and Welsh Funding Councils under the chairmanship of Sir Brian 
Follett. One of the Review's sub-groups is directly concerned with human 
resource management and staffing issues. This sub-group, chaired by 
Professor Roger King, Vice Chancellor of the University of Humberside, 
commissioned a consultancy study from John Fielden Consultancy on 25th 
February 1993. The study was led by John Fielden with help from Allan 
Schofield of The Higher Education Consultancy Group.

1.2The brief agreed for the study was as follows;

to examine the changing situation in higher education with regard to the 
staffing and organisation of learning and research support services,

to identify the most likely future models of service (with a consequent 
definition of roles for those academic, academic-related and support 
staff involved), taking experience in the USA and Australia into account,

on the basis of these definitions, to review the human resource 
management implications of the possible new structures, and to consider 
how the required performance standards might be achieved (eg; by the 
Information and Library Services NVQ competency frameworks or by 
in-service staff development) by the holder of each role,

to report on the implications of the changes in human resource management 
structures for performance review and staff appraisal systems,

to recommend the levels and types of national support thought necessary. 

1.3Our study coincided with the preparation and despatch to all 
libraries of a major questionnaire by LISU (the Library and Information 
Statistics Unit). Thanks to the helpful collaboration of John Sumsion, 
LISU's Director, we were able to incorporate a few questions in his 
questionnaire and to read all the answers relating to people and their 
management. 

1.4In the course of the three month period March to May 1993 we visited 
or spoke to a large number of the senior staff in the academic library 
and information service world. Their names and affiliations are shown in 
Appendix I. In addition we trawled the literature relating to human 
resource management in libraries. A selection of the publications we 
examined is given in Appendix II. This is not intended to be a 
comprehensive bibliography; for example, many of the excellent COPOL and 
Library Association publications are not listed as they are assumed to be 
known to all.

1.5A small Steering Group guided our work and gave us confidence to put 
forward some future projections. Its members, who were also very helpful 
to us individually, were Professor Roger Lewis, University of Humberside, 
Joan Day from the University of Northumbria at Newcastle, Dr Tom Graham, 
Librarian at the University of York and Kevin Ellard, University 
Librarian at the University of Staffordshire. They participated in a 
workshop at which we developed our thinking about the future and helped 
us by providing advice at two other meetings and reviewing our report.

1.6One major problem for anyone writing about academic libraries in 
1993 relates to language and definitions. The term 'Library' itself is 
becoming less used as the name for the place where books and, to a lesser 
extent, learning materials are kept. Information Centres, Library and 
Information Services, Learning Support Centres, Learning Resource 
Centres, Academic Services, Educational Services are terms used to 
describe a rapidly evolving organisational scene. Within these new 
organisations there are staff of very differing backgrounds and skills. 
Thus, the words 'library' and 'librarian' could confuse the reader and we 
have therefore decided to adopt the phrase Library/ Information Service 
staff (or LIS staff, for short) to cover the wide range of people 
included in our study. Finally, we use the word 'university' to cover all 
the colleges of higher education and non university institutions funded 
by the HE Funding Councils, as well as the other universities.

1.7Further definitional and language problems can arise over the use of 
terms such as 'professional' and non professional' to describe categories 
of staff. Although these words are widely understood to mean the same 
things in most of the old universities, they are becoming increasingly 
meaningless as roles change and graduates take up a much wider range of 
posts within LIS. Clerical and 'non professional' are not synonymous any 
more, in the same way that 'professional' no longer means academic-
related. We comment extensively on this topic in Chapter 4, but, for want 
of an alternative, use the terms in the text in the sense that the old 
universities have traditionally used them, but show our hesitance by 
placing them in inverted commas. 

1.8We suspect that the readers of this report will, in the main, be LIS 
staff, but we have still sought to avoid obvious library jargon. In case 
we have failed we attach as the last Appendix a list of abbreviations and 
acronyms.

1.9In order to assist all senior LIS staff in considering the adequacy 
of their human resource management policies and procedures, it had been 
our original intention to include an appendix with extensive data on 
institutional staffing (e.g. numbers of staff, grades, both overall 
staffing expenditure and also detailed budgetary information on 
activities such as training). We have not followed this idea further in 
the light of the inclusion in the main Review Group Report of Pages 15 
and 16 describing typical university libraries. 

1.10The Review Group Report is in the business of looking forwards. 
An obvious question is how far we make assumptions about change, 
particularly in the notoriously treacherous areas of new technology. Just 
when one thought it was safe to generalise that most predictions by 
enthusiasts are always optimistic, one is caught out by the rapid take up 
of some technologies such as the fax and the CD-ROM. For many 
institutions this report comes at a critical time - almost of hiatus - 
when the impact of the changes wrought by electronic access and text is 
still being thought through. In this report we have taken the year 2000 
as the boundary for our predictions; we have pitched our recommendations 
at the progressive institution, which has a clear strategy for its LIS 
activities at the centre of teaching and learning. We have assumed a 
fairly rapid spread of internal networks and growing access to externally 
held text (as opposed to bibliographies). We have also assumed a 
continuing increase in student numbers after the present pause and 
consequent pressures on learning resources. 

1.11The structure of this report is simple: Chapter 2 describes the 
present position with a focus on the changes that affect staff and their 
roles. In Chapter 3 we look forward and speculate about future trends and 
attempt to define some models for the future; as we conclude that there 
is too large a number of variable factors to make agreement on models 
possible, we focus on what particular LIS staff functions will look like 
in the future. In Chapter 4 we turn to Human Resource Management (HRM) 
topics such as grade structures, staff appraisal, staff development and 
the role of NVQs; in this chapter we outline some recommendations for 
universities, COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG or the CVCP and the Funding Councils. 
Finally, Chapter 5 pulls all this together in a summary with conclusions, 
as well as providing ideas for discussing and disseminating our 
recommendations.


2What is Happening Now?

Introduction

2.1In this section we give a short, and inevitably selective, summary 
of the changes taking place within university libraries. The main 
problems we face, as do all observers of the UK LIS scene, are the scale 
of change and the range of types of institution and LIS. Generalisations 
are not at all easy; the LISU questionnaire has sub-divided its 
respondents into six categories; even this brings together some disparate 
institutions with very differing goals and structures. Nonetheless, we 
believe it is important to survey the scene before we attempt to analyse 
what the changes mean for LIS staff in the future. 

Patterns of use of the library

2.2Every available statistic seems to show an increasing use of 
libraries. LISU's questionnaire analysis reports that since 1986/87 the 
volume of lending has risen by 38%, while reservations traffic is up by 
97%, no doubt reflecting the adoption of on-line reservation systems 
between the two dates. Where this happened, there is a problem of 
comparing borrowers' practices under two different systems. Individual 
institutions' annual reports show increases of 40 -50% in readers in the 
last year and two former polytechnics say that 50% of their FTEs now 
enter the library daily.

2.3In terms of year-on-year increase one former polytechnic recorded 
the following trends between 1990/91 and 1991/92:

Number of reader visitsUp by 25%

Hours of openingUp by 8%

Peak occupancy at 11.30amUp from 51% to 72%

Inter Library Loans Up by 37%

On the basis of our visits these statistics would seem to be 
representative of the former polytechnic sector, at least.

2.4If we were to assume that a constant percentage of readers needed 
help from an enquiry desk, the implications of the growth in numbers 
would be that front line staff were coming under increasing pressure. 
However, this assumption is doubtful because there is a growing belief 
that a higher proportion of student readers need help, since they 
sometimes reach the library with fewer information/study skills than 
hitherto or with projects which expect a greater knowledge of library 
resources. They are also faced with a wider range of possible sources to 
explore, often involving new accessing techniques. Partly as a result of 
this, LISU reports that there has been a 52% increase in staff time since 
1986/87 spent training/teaching users in study/library skills.

2.5Our visits gave us the impression that opening hours were extending 
everywhere; this is not borne out by LISU's figures, however, which show 
an average of only one hour increase for all services since 1986/87 and a 
six hour increase in the availability of lending facilities. One possible 
reason for this relatively small increase may be that in the mid-1980s 
some libraries were forced to cut their hours in response to financial 
pressures; the restoration of these cuts could account for some of the 
recent increases. Nonetheless, the average weekly hours of lending 
availability are now 65 and this is well below the Ross Report's1 
recommendations of 75 hours as the standard for Australian universities 
in 1990.

2.6In the last five years the two major technical innovations have been 
the widespread access to data bases of all kinds (such as DIALOG, LEXIS, 
BIOSIS) and the introduction of CD-ROMs. The latter offer users either a 
comprehensive bibliography in a subject area or a range of text. The 
present take-up of CD-ROMs is still small; most of those we visited held 
between 8 and 15 titles, although LISU reports 7 universities as having 
more than 30. The staffing impact is that users need to be shown how to 
access the CD-ROM and then, if they are successful in finding a 
reference, they will usually need to place an Inter Library Loan (ILL) in 
order to obtain it. Universities which have a number of CD-ROMs 
accessible on their network reported an increase in their ILLs to us. 

2.7Until recently the use of on-line searching by universities was 
growing steadily. However, as the Background Introduction reports2, this 
use now seems to have reached a plateau. The reasons given are the ready 
accessibility of CD-ROMs in a self-service mode and block network 
arrangements (such as the Bath ISI Data Service (BIDS)), where for a 
fixed subscription a university gets unlimited access to a growing 
database and is able to offer this through its internal network. 
Traditionally, mediated on-line searching has been charged for and 
rationed. 

2.8Not only are there more readers, but also the type of reader and 
his/her requirements are changing. The non-traditional or part time 
student may form as much as 40% of the total population. They will have 
special needs for access at unusual times, they will hope to receive the 
same standards of service as the full timer; they may live a distance 
away and be unable to meet the terms of short loans; they could be 
disabled and have physical access problems. Most of these factors have an 
implication for the planning of services. Our visits gave us the 
impression that few libraries were able to meet these needs and that this 
will become an increasingly important issue to be resolved.

The campus network and the 'desktop library'

2.9A feature of almost all university campuses in the second half of 
the 1980s has been the investment in local area networks so that 
computing access can be available to the widest possible audience. In the 
more advanced networks terminals are placed in all academic staff offices 
and student residences as well as in all teaching and study rooms. One 
new university is building a Learning Resources Centre in which up to one 
third of the carrels will be provided with terminals accessed to the 
network. The network makes it possible to use electronic mail for 
internal communications and messages and JANET and INTERNET for 
international academic communications. Management information is also 
available in a few systems allowing managers with delegated authorities 
to draw on central university data bases. In some more recent cases the 
network infrastructure is planned to take non textual material such as 
video and graphics.

2.10The library service has been a basic element of most networks. 
As soon as it was appreciated that customers throughout a university 
needed remote access to the catalogue, it was an obvious step to place it 
on the menu of services. From this other services are developing; the 
ability to make reservations, to check borrowing records, to renew 
issues, to place orders for ILLs, to access CD-ROMs for information etc. 
On our visits we found other examples of applications in operation or 
being planned:

Access to the stock records of the local academic bookshop.

Direct access to BIDS, CURL and other bibliographic databases, such as 
EXTEL.

Distributed directories of library catalogues in neighbouring 
institutions or national/public libraries.


Interactive live video networking, in which speakers and students at 
different institutions will be linked live.

2.11The staffing implications of a fully developed range of library 
services accessible to all on a network are that it would reduce some of 
the clerical and physical tasks at the issues desk as well as 
bibliographic and search support to enquirers. Both these assumptions 
presume that users are able to master the technology and that simpler 
interfaces than hitherto can be developed. The University of Stirling, 
for example, believes this is possible and is developing user-friendly 
menus with icons and mouse pointing3 and claims that 90% of the staff in 
its School of Arts are now provided with micro computers. 

2.12A further development, prompted by the network availability, is 
the growing interest in the concept of self-service. By this is meant the 
ability of the reader to perform many of the routine functions which 
library staff would normally fulfil. Some of these functions, such as 
reserving or renewing, do not involve handling a book or a journal and 
are easily undertaken remotely through a terminal. In order to issue a 
book the self-service operation requires both the reader and the book to 
be inside the library. Two questions then arise: whether students can be 
relied upon to carry out the issue routines effectively and whether extra 
security staff are needed to police the system. If the latter is thought 
necessary, the cost-effectiveness of self-service issues might be in 
doubt, as there might be no savings in direct costs. Since there are very 
few examples of self-service issue systems in operation, no evaluation is 
yet possible. We understand that a significant amount of current opinion 
has still to be convinced that it is a practical option.  
Numbers of staff 

2.13One objective of LISU's questionnaire was to obtain reliable 
figures for the current numbers of staff in academic libraries and to see 
whether their numbers had grown since 1986/87. However, since some 
libraries were not able to give figures for their staff in 1986/87, it 
has not proved possible to get good total figures for all institutions or 
to work out percentage increases on the absolute figures. Thus, LISU has 
had to use average figures for its staff statistics on all academic 
libraries and its findings are as follows:

1986/871991/92% Increase 
Average 'prof 'l'
staff numbers 16.7 17.6 5.3
Average 'non-prof 'l' 
staff numbers 22.7 26.3 15.8 
Average total 
staff numbers 44.5 50.6 13.7
Average total
establishment 38.9 43.3 11.3

2.14These averages conceal very wide variations in the six different 
kinds of library identified by LISU. The most distinctive category is the 
52 specialist colleges and colleges of higher education where the numbers 
of 'professional' and 'non professional' staff averaged 5 each in 
1986/87. By 1991/92 in that category the 'professional' staff figure was 
constant, but the 'non professional' staff average had risen to 8. 

2.15The averages do not tell us anything about the range of staffing 
numbers found in individual institutions. The LISU statistics can 
nonetheless provide some enlightening information on the respective 
ratios between student numbers and library staff in the different 
categories of institution. These show that there is a very large 
difference in the staffing levels between the large/postgraduate 
institution and the old polytechnics (called 1992 Universities) and that 
this difference has not changed since 1986/87. The relevant figures are 
as follows:

Ratios of Student Numbers to Library Staff

LISU Category 1986/87  1991/92 Percentage
worsening (or improvement)
1. Large, 
Postgraduate, Misc323612
2. Pre 1960 
Universities779523
3. 1960-1992
Universities8810721
 4. 1992 
Universities11215034
5. Colleges;
General &  
Education162157(3)
6. Colleges: 
Specialist 9911516

TOTAL8910921

The other striking findings from the table are the small relative 
improvement in the staffing levels in "General Colleges" and the 
worsening position, relatively, of the 1992 Universities.

2.16There is a difference in the growth of 'non professionals' in 
the old and the new universities between 1986/87 and 1991/92. In the old 
universities the average numbers grew by 9% from 34 to 37, while in the 
old polytechnics they increased by 30%, from 27 to 35. The questionnaire 
also provided some comparative data on absolute staff numbers as follows:

1986/87:
'Professionals'2535(152 returns)
'Non professionals'3360(148 returns)
Total staff6460(145 returns)

1991/92
'Professionals'2766(157 returns)
'Non professionals'4102(156 returns)
Total staff7794(154 returns) 

2.17If one could assume that the missing 1986/87 returns all 
conformed to the average, the statistics would allow one to say that the 
increases in numbers of library staff since 1986/87 have been at least 
approximately as follows:
147 'professionals'
560 'non professionals'
226 ancillary/other staff
933 staff in total.

2.18The SCONUL statistics for the old universities show the numbers 
of 'professional' staff holding constant between 1986/87 and 1990/91 at 
1370. The COPOL statistics in the same period present a small increase 
from 23.3 to 24.3 in the average number of 'professionals' per 
polytechnic and an increase in the total numbers of library staff per 
polytechnic from 55.5 to 56.3. 

2.19Another recent survey (details confidential and thus 
unpublished) of the total staff numbers in COPOL institutions shows an 
increase of between 5 and 10% in numbers between 1990/91 and 1991/92, but 
these figures include temporary and casual staff.

2.20The conclusions from these surveys seem to be that:

while there has been a small increase in 'professional' staff there has 
been a much larger one in 'non professional' numbers,

some of the growth may be due to the staff now involved in income 
generating activities or funded library research,

further growth in numbers of 'non-professionals' may result from the 
addition of audio visual, photographic units etc to the LIS, 

some growth might be attributable to the expansion of the sector and it 
may not have been possible to obtain 1986/87 figures for those colleges 
of education which have merged into the old polytechnics, for example, 
and which are counted in the 1991/92 figures,

there is an increasing use of students and other casual labour as well as 
short term contracts offered to people before they attend courses in 
librarianship, 

it is possible that institutions do not report all the 
part-time or casual staff or those whose salaries they meet from fines, 
photocopies etc to the SCONUL/COPOL surveys.

2.21It also must be accepted that it is becoming harder and harder 
to complete statistical or other returns on the "library", as its 
boundaries with information services and other support services become 
blurred. For example, some staff now classed as library staff are helping 
to run university computing services.

Financial factors

2.22 Although financial factors are not directly within our brief, 
the financial health of LIS has an obvious impact on staffing decisions. 
In a few universities there has been a strategic decision to invest more 
in LIS in order to build up stocks and remedy past neglect. In most 
cases, however, the recurrent expenditure has fallen significantly. 
LISU's Annual Library Statistics show that in the old universities 
library expenditure represented 2.92% of the total in 1991/92 compared 
with 4.0% in 1980/81. (However, a change in university accounting 
presentation in the late 1989 and a dramatic growth in expenditure not 
financed by the Funding Councils will account for some of this 
differential). Within the expenditure total the real book spend per 
person (simple totals of staff and students) fell from  60 to  33 in the 
old universities and  34 to  18 in the old polytechnics over the same ten 
year period. Surprisingly, expenditure on staff has remained almost 
constant at about 55% and has not increased. This is probably caused by 
the greater increase in the numbers of 'para-professional' or clerical 
rather than 'professional' staff; this leads to a consequent fall in the 
average cost per staff member.

2.23If a university is unable to afford to buy as many books as 
before, it is possible that students might step in and buy them 
themselves. Although no firm statistics exist, the responses to LISU's 
questionnaire are almost unanimous that student purchasing of textbooks 
has declined substantially in recent years for obvious reasons. 
Modularisation is also a contributory factor; whereas a student might 
have invested in a textbook which ran through a whole year or more, 
taking a number of shorter modules presents a set of very different 
investment decisions. The other effect of modularisation is that the 
library is faced with peaks of demand for basic texts and is under 
pressure to buy multiple copies in response.

2.24One side effect of the growing volume of students has been the 
increase in income from fines and photocopying. It is usual for this 
money to be retained within the Library budget. As a consequence we have 
noticed a growing number of 
part-time or contract posts supported from internally generated funds of 
this kind. Other income-generating activities are also engaging 
management's attention. Not many institutions, however, will be able to 
emulate two well known libraries seeking to obtain  8 and  10 million in 
endowments from a fund-raising campaign.

Convergence

2.25The term 'convergence' has been used to describe the coming 
together of the library and the information/computing service. For the 
last seven or eight years it has been the main driver of change in the 
organisation of the library service in the UK and the USA. A special 
issue of the British Journal of Academic Librarianship was devoted to the 
topic in 1988. Recently COPOL has published a survey of the way 
convergence has been handled in a range of institutions4.

2.26For the purposes of this study we believe that it is helpful to 
distinguish between two types of convergence, as regards the 
information/computing service:

'organisational or formal convergence' in which the two services (or, as 
we shall see, several others also) are brought together for management 
purposes. In its most limited form this may mean that one person is put 
in overall control of the two services with no other organisational 
change to the status quo.

'operational or informal convergence' in which the detailed functions or 
operations of the two services change or are brought together. It is not 
necessary to have organisational convergence for operational convergence 
to happen (for example, the heads of two services can undertake joint 
strategic planning); similarly, operational convergence does not 
necessarily follow organisational convergence.

2.27A simple glance down the names of the interviewees in Appendix I 
will show the extent of organisational convergence. Strange new titles 
abound. It is clear that there has been very substantial restructuring in 
the area of information and libraries. However, it would be a mistake to 
focus just on computing and libraries coming together, as it is 
increasingly common for one senior position to be created, and for a wide 
range of 'academic services' or 'learner support services' to be placed 
under the incumbent. Although there is no quantitative data on the extent 
of this, our visits suggest the following picture:

i)A high percentage of libraries, particularly in the 'new' 
universities and colleges of higher education, contain within them media 
or audio visual units, which can vary from the vibrant, active, well-
equipped service delivering teaching, inter alia, to the declining, 
under-used service which holds a few technicians who take off-air 
recordings to order or service equipment in lecture rooms.

ii)A very few converged organisations contain a university staff 
development function, which may or may not have the role of helping to 
design new teaching materials (particularly in open learning format), but 
which is basically charged with running programmes to help staff to 
enhance their performance. In some cases the Enterprise in Higher 
Education programme has staff who have merged their roles with the staff 
development function.

iii)Similarly, some of the converged groupings house a central 
university TLTP advisory service, which helps staff to adapt new 
technology and develop computer or interactive video-based materials.

iv)In several institutions a management information systems section, 
which is responsible for administrative computing, reports to the head of 
the LIS function, although it is more common for it to be accountable to 
an officer in the central university administration. In the days when the 
academic computer centre ran a large number of programmes for clients 
there was a logic to having administrative computing managed separately. 
Now that most academic computing takes place away from a central 
mainframe, there are arguments for reuniting the MIS function with the 
computing centre.

v)Some cases exist of the university's central print department coming 
within the LIS umbrella; this has advantages as regards offering a wide 
range of services to customers.

vi)We found isolated instances of student services (accommodation and 
counselling) and the careers service coming together organisationally 
with LIS.

2.28Organisational convergence can mean very different things: from 
the unification of the two key services to a loose grouping of academic 
services. However, it can have significant political and financial 
advantages within the institution. The head of the converged service may 
be senior enough to join the senior management team, which can bring 
valuable clout, as well as information, to discussions about future 
library strategy and forms of learning support available to students. In 
addition, if the budgets of the services are combined, and if virement is 
allowed, their manager has much more financial flexibility and scope for 
changing the 
status quo.

2.29In practice, the decisive factors in whether or not 
organisational convergence happens are often the retirement of either the 
head of the computing service or the librarian or the competence of 
either person in their role. Thus, personal and political factors play 
the biggest role in deciding what functions or units shall come within 
the converged organisation. As Ivan Sidgreaves puts it: "there is clearly 
no best design, no ideal. Each is dependent on local environmental 
factors, personalities, the institution's historical development, its 
overall aims and objectives and, inevitably, the resources available5". 
There is a lively debate on the merits of organisational convergence, 
exhibited by the recent correspondence in The Higher where a 
distinguished Librarian argues against common management of the two 
services since " at the very least the priorities and management needs in 
two such diverse bodies are incompatible6". Thus, many universities 
having considered the idea of converging their library and academic 
computing services have decided not to do so.

2.30Operational convergence is defined as bringing together the 
operations and functions of the two services. In our experience it occurs 
to varying degrees in particular areas. The present UK position seems to 
be:

Joint strategic planning is probably the most common example. In an age 
when almost all future developments of the library are Information 
Systems (IS) based it makes obvious sense for the strategies of the two 
services to be developed together. The basic argument for convergence 
rests on this commonality of purpose and function, now that information 
and information handling is at the core of so many university tasks. We 
found many examples where a joint planning activity occurred between the 
two services without organisational convergence.

Joint use and joint development of networks is an obvious corollary. The 
LIS service is totally dependent on the network managers for extensions 
to campus-wide information systems and for opening up navigational routes 
to the many new electronic databases that the academic community is 
seeking to explore.

Physical co-location of the library and some of the open access terminals 
of the computing service is becoming a common solution, as it offers 
students access to terminals for the longer opening hours of the library. 
It does not always mean anything more than physical co-location, and 
possibly shared janitor services, but in a few universities it is 
beginning to raise the option of establishing common enquiry or help 
desks (for the more simple, first-line, enquiry).

Joint provision of training for students or staff on 'information 
literacy' is beginning to happen spasmodically. It makes sense for users 
to have only one tutorial session (or open learning pack/CAL package) 
devoted to the mechanics of accessing all the offerings on the 
university's network. This can be provided by either LIS or computing 
service staff.

Physical combination of the resource materials of the various services is 
sometimes found, particularly in the colleges of higher education. When a 
shelf has books, CAL discs, audio and video tapes side by side, it has 
operationally converged its stock of learning resources. In one 
institution we visited the OPAC terminals were able to show users the 
full range of such materials under subject headings.

2.31The staffing implications of greater operational convergence are 
significant, while those of organisational convergence could well be 
minimal. Thus, in Chapter 3 when we consider future trends, we shall look 
very carefully at the likelihood of operational convergence becoming 
wider and deeper.
 
Internal structures

2.32We have already suggested that generalisations about change in 
the LIS field are extremely hazardous. We will, however, make some 
observations on organisation and structure which seem to be reasonably 
widespread.

2.33The main functions of a traditional university library can be 
described as follows:

Acquiring and cataloguing books and serials.

Supplying books, ILLs and other services to customers face-to-face.

Maintaining special collections.

Helping readers with information and advice of all kinds.

Internal management and housekeeping.

2.34The most common structure is for all the library's activities to 
be divided into reader services (with a customer orientation) and 
internal technical services (with an efficiency/process orientation). 
There are sometimes third or fourth wings relating to internal management 
support in finance, training or internal computer systems and to special 
collections or conservation, where relevant. The two main service arms 
have differing growth rates, since technical services are benefitting 
from new approaches to cataloguing and processing with a consequent fall 
in staffing needs, while the volume of work in reader services is 
directly related to reader numbers. One organisational variation is the 
difference in approach to locating the work of the circulation services, 
issue desks etc. In some institutions they are placed with reader 
services, while in others they report separately to a deputy or senior 
librarian.  

2.35The number of library sites has an impact on structure and staff 
roles. Where the computing and library services are converged and there 
are several site libraries, there is an obvious preference to co-locate 
the two sets of computing and library advisers in schools or faculties 
close to their customers. It also becomes less easy to centralise all the 
technical functions and individual staff tend to have a more varied 
workload, although it is more likely to be specialised in subject terms. 

2.36One notable feature of most of the institutions we visited was 
the use of working groups or teams, taking staff from various grades, to 
develop new services or policies. This approach was applied to projects 
such as the introduction of new technologies, to planning longer term 
activities such as staff development programmes, and, in some cases, to 
the development or discussion of the library's strategic plan. Within 
reason this approach can be a very helpful way of getting workable 
solutions to problems and commitment and ownership from all levels of 
staff. It also helps to break down any barriers that might exist between 
different grades. In one university this project basis of operations is 
used for all LIS functions:  there is no formal organisation structure 
and every task is carried out by project teams containing mixed grades of 
staff.

Open learning

2.37 A number of interesting developments have taken place both 
inside and outside the formal education system in the introduction of 
open learning, designed to encourage flexibility of delivery to learners. 
Supported initially by organisations like the Open University, the 
National Extension College, and subsequently by the Open College, open 
learning now forms part of the approach to training operated by many 
commercial organisations. It is increasingly being considered as having 
major potential for teaching in higher education, both for reasons of 
effective resource utilisation and also for enhancing student autonomy in 
learning.

2.38 A number of approaches to the implementation of open learning 
can be discerned:

In-company use where both generic and bespoke learning materials are 
provided as part of a coordinated approach to staff training. The open 
learning centres of such companies as Lucas, British Steel and Rover are 
well known in this regard, and all have been supported by considerable 
investment. The size, organisation and scale of such centres varies, but 
typically they will be small units, located near to the production 
facilities, and operating on either a 'drop in' or 'by arrangement' 
basis. Staff support in such centres tends to be restricted to the 
provision of materials and the checking of facilities (video etc), with 
some initial tutorial assistance in some cases, as learners work through 
pre-determined material at their own speed.

Course delivery through open learning by private suppliers. An example of 
this approach is Sight and Sound Ltd, who deliver a small number of 
secretarial and business courses to large numbers of students in centres 
throughout the country. Using carefully structured open learning 
materials, learners receive immediate support from instructors (usually 
themselves recent users of the same material) who assess work and provide 
immediate assistance and tutorial help. More experienced support from 
supervisors is available if required.

Course delivery by higher education institutions. The most notable 
example is the Open University, with its extensive range of programmes 
and support initiatives for both its students and staff.

Open learning materials produced by publishers for delivery within either 
the public or private sector. In this context Macmillans have recently 
produced extensive materials to support open learning programmes for 
nursing, and have entered into a formal relationship with at least one 
higher education institution to deliver them.

2.39 Clearly all of these approaches will develop further during the 
next decade and all pose different organisational and staffing questions 
for institutions, in particular regarding the role of library/information 
services in the delivery of material. A key factor with them all, 
however, is the competence of staff to design, produce and deliver such 
material. Where universities invest resources in the development of open 
learning, care will need to be taken to ensure that adequate training is 
provided for staff. How this will involve those within both 
library/information services and academic departments will have to be 
carefully thought through. In this context the Training and Development 
NVQ Lead Body has developed standards from which a qualification has been 
developed for staff involved in the delivery of open learning (ADDFOL - 
Awards in the Development and Design of Flexible and Open Learning). The 
implications of this for higher education staff are discussed at the end 
of Chapter 4.

New teaching/learning methods

2.40LISU's questionnaire asked respondents about the changes in the 
way students use the library and it is clear from the answers and from 
our visits that several different developments are under way:

Some tutors are giving students tasks or projects which encourage them to 
use the library's resources more actively than before. In a few cases 
these tasks are expected to be performed collectively and a requirement 
is emerging for more communal study space within the library, where 
talking is possible. On our visits we found cases of tension developing 
between LIS and academic staff because of problems arising when large 
numbers of students descend on the library with identical projects. Since 
this trend is likely to continue, there will be an increasing need for 
close liaison and a partnership approach to solving these difficulties. 

There is an increase in the take-up of non-book materials but we do not 
believe this to be very significant, In the libraries we visited it was 
common to see areas of space dedicated to video or other non-book 
materials. The former were usually bought commercially, although in some 
cases they were the off-air recordings or productions of the Audio Visual 
Unit.

There is still very little evidence of the use of either CBL courseware 
or open learning packs within the library. No statistics are available on 
the extent of their use. We found very few libraries which stored them 
and understand that they are usually held either within a central 
Learning Support or CAL service or within the academic department 
concerned,

Where course study packs are developed by tutors within a department (for 
example, course readers), they can have the effect of ensuring that the 
student concerned has all the material needed for his/her assessed work 
and thus may not enter the library at all. There are financial 
implications to the increasing use of study packs, but these depend on 
the way the university budgets for its payments to the Copyright 
Licensing Authority (CLA). There are, as yet, no instances of the library 
becoming a textbook and study pack warehouse or sales outlet (as has been 
reported elsewhere in some continental institutions).

2.41Although the extent of innovation in open learning has not 
matched expectations, it is now widely assumed that Funding Council 
pressures will lead to a greater take-up and there are matching 
expectations that the role of the library will be central to new 
teaching/learning methods. Paragraph 1.6 of the MacFarlane Report7, for 
example, pointed out that libraries are a vitally important part of all 
higher education institutions. In simplified terms, one of the key 
arguments which is developed in this report is that there will be a 
progressively increasing emphasis on, and provision for, self-paced 
teacher-supported individual learning. This implies an appropriate 
provision of supporting resources, available in a wide range of media and 
delivered by a variety of means. Library resources and functions would be 
key elements in providing the necessary learning support. 

2.42The thrust of MacFarlane is principally towards the wider use of 
educational technology as a means of handling growing student numbers. 
His committee believes that it is the principal way in which quality 
teaching and learning can be maintained. His future model assumes a wide 
range of courseware available to all on the university network, rather 
than padlocked in departmental cupboards. Were this to happen, the 
converged Library/ Learning Resource Centre by virtue of its terminals, 
its opening hours and its other resources would inevitably become one of 
the main centres in the delivery of teaching and learning.

External influences

2.43Since the beginning of 1993 two relevant external reports have 
appeared which have a bearing on the future of library staff: Promoting 
People, the report of a CVCP Committee chaired by Professor Brian Fender 
on the management and development of staff, and Review of the Academic 
Year8, the interim report of the Committee of Enquiry chaired by Lord 
Flowers.

2.44The Fender report has taken grading structures and pay 
bargaining as its main themes. In Chapter 4 we study the topic of staff 
grades in the library context and explore the need for structures which 
will improve flexibility. Professor Fender also pushes for universities 
to adopt the best human resource management practices that are currently 
available elsewhere. This is clearly non contentious material and we have 
been delighted to find that some libraries have been leading the way for 
their institutions in such good practices; for example, the statements of 
staff development policy sent to LISU were usually library documents 
rather than university ones.

2.45Lord Flowers' report looks at the implications of various 
options for extending the academic year. The main references to libraries 
in paragraphs 72, 73 and 144 refer to the space rather than the staffing 
implications and it is implied that more library accommodation would be 
needed if there was a move to a longer year. The implications for staff 
are not fully evaluated although it is accepted that tasks which 
libraries now do in the less intensive summer period would have to be 
done in weekends, evenings and at night and "the extra costs would not be 
insubstantial". 

2.46Some more assumptions about the implications for library staff 
are laid out in Annex D of the Flowers Report which attempts to work 
through the resource implications of a three cohort three entry system. 
Few librarians would agree with its statement that "academically related 
staff are seen as only related in a minor way to reader numbers, for 
advisory duties for example, but much more to the size of the book stock 
for cataloguing and similar duties." The Annex then continues, more 
credibly, "Among other staff, issue clerks are clearly dependent on 
increased numbers and some additional staff will be required." The 
overall effect of the assumptions on staff costs in the report is that, 
for a 50% increase in non medical undergraduates, library staff costs are 
assumed to increase by 17%. The same Annex projects an increase in 
academic staff costs of 51.1%. These figures do of course relate only to 
the effect that undergraduate activities have on staff.

2.47While we are certain that most librarians will reject the 
estimates, there is sure to be agreement that a move to a full use of the 
year for teaching purposes will have a serious effect on library staff 
workload and would lead inevitably to calls for more resources, drawn 
from the extra fees and Funding Council grants earned.

Customer service

2.48In many private and public sector organisations it has become 
commonplace to pay increased attention to enhancing customer service 
(although this is not always successfully achieved) and some libraries 
have started to take formal initiatives in this field in order to improve 
their own performance for those who use their services. Such initiatives 
include:

Staff training, particularly in the interpersonal skills required for 
dealing with customers on the front line.

The introduction of ways of evaluating the quality of LIS service through 
various forms of customer feedback, including questionnaires and surveys, 
informal meetings and focus groups, formal institutional user committees, 
suggestion boxes, suggestion and 'graffiti' boards and so on.

Running customer service improvement programmes, perhaps as part of other 
quality management strategies such as TQM.

2.49It is likely that this last area of carefully organised customer 
service programmes will become much more widespread in the future. Such 
programmes may take a variety of forms, but common features will include:  
carefully considered customer service policies which will shape 
improvement programmes and direct service priorities; extensive 
information on customer requirements obtained through a number of sources 
including direct feedback; the identification of customer service 
standards that are both quantitative and qualitative; the formulation of 
customer service plans for improvement; the growth of service level 
agreements with internal customers in which the nature and standards of 
service to be provided are agreed; the identification of ways of ensuring 
continuous improvement; and widespread training to support enhanced 
customer service for all staff - perhaps crucially for those middle 
managers who have frequently found such changes difficult to implement in 
other parts of some universities.

2.50Although the idea of improving customer service is one that has 
immediate appeal to many university libraries - not least because of the 
existing service roles of LIS staff - improving service to meet the needs 
of customers is anything but a simple activity, as numerous changes in 
existing work patterns and staff attitudes may be needed. One issue may 
be briefly taken as an example: the opening hours of libraries. As 
reported elsewhere in paragraph 2.5, although many libraries have 
extended slightly their opening hours and some intend to do so much 
further, the delivery of a full range of service raises not just obvious 
resource, staffing, building and security implications, it also raises 
fundamental questions of institutional and staff attitudes to their roles 
and the extent to which traditional ways of working need to be changed 
(for example, the 9-5 pattern of working of many 'professional' library 
staff).

Changing roles of LIS staff

2.51We have now described the extensive structural, technical and 
process-based change which is taking place in libraries and information 
services. The obvious questions now arise: what does this mean for the 
people involved and how has it changed their roles?

2.52We believe that the salient points as regards staffing impact 
are as follows:

Since 1986 the numbers of staff have increased by almost 1000, partly due 
to the very large increase in customer numbers and the demand for higher 
quality information support. 

Institutional LIS managers have generally structured their professional 
staff to serve academic customers in faculty or school groupings and this 
is helping to bring them closer.

There are some remarkable examples of subject librarians playing a 
formative role in course design and contributing to faculty courses on 
study skills, but there are many more cases where the liaison is weak.

Increasingly, students are asking questions of library staff which 
require pedagogical and subject knowledge; this may in some instances be 
due to ineffective briefing by their tutors.

Cataloguing, and in some cases, classification is increasingly being done 
by 'para-professional' or senior clerical staff, with the support of 
automated/electronic services.

'Para-professional' and clerical staff are being asked to take over at 
the enquiry desks and handle the bulk of the queries, leaving only a few 
subject-based questions for the information specialist to handle.

A wide range of flexible staffing solutions is being adopted to providing 
staff during Saturday and Sunday, including using former employees, LIS 
students, students and offering time off in lieu to existing staff.

Among the obstacles to greater staff flexibility is the complex grading 
structure with varying conditions of service which prevents flexible 
working patterns (see Chapter 4).

2.53We now look forward to the year 2000 to see if we can arrive at 
a set of assumptions about the extent of further changes and their effect 
on library staff. 

3Assumptions About Future Change
Funding Council and other policy pressures

3.1In paragraph 1.10 we set out some simple assumptions about the 
higher educational environment between now and the year 2000. These are 
that student numbers will continue to grow after the current pause and 
that Government will expect to see continuing 'efficiency gains'. The 
Average Unit of Council Funding (AUCF) for each academic subject group 
therefore will continue to fall. The principal unknown factor is how many 
institutions will feel able to charge 'top-up fees' in order to meet 
higher costs. It would be a reasonable assumption that the LIS service 
will benefit to some extent where these fees are charged.

3.2Government policy will stress the need for flexibility in the 
provision of higher education and the modes by which students learn will 
continue to change; some of the former polytechnics and colleges of 
higher education have very significant provision for part-timers and 
distance learners, but the equivalent percentages in the old universities 
are still small. 

3.3In view of the short term Public Expenditure Survey (PES) outlook it 
is unrealistic to expect that the Review Group Report will propose any 
significant increases in funding for university library and information 
services. However, this should not rule out the provision of funds for 
special short term initiatives, or pump-priming of pilot projects. We do 
not think it likely that the Funding Councils will earmark any funds for 
LIS use, as this would go against their recent policies of reducing 
earmarking. There might, nonetheless, be words of encouragement or advice 
for institutions on how to treat their LIS activities.

Lessons from the USA and Australia

3.4There is an ingrained expectation among professionals of all kinds 
that their US equivalents have the answers to common problems. Several 
North American librarians have, flatteringly, said in conversation that 
they expect the same from the UK. Risking gross oversimplification 
because of the size and variety of the higher education system, we 
believe that US university libraries are facing remarkably similar 
problems to their UK counterparts. 

3.5Our reviews of the literature suggests the following picture:

That organisational convergence has taken place within a wider framework 
with the creation in many institutions of a post of Chief Information 
Officer reporting to a Vice President (Academic), but in only 14% of the 
cases does the Vice President (Academic) have the University Librarian 
reporting to him9. 

That many universities are better endowed with computing hardware (to a 
great extent purchased by the students themselves), fully networked, and 
that as a result there is greater potential for the use of CBL and 
courseware and for students to learn to access databases.

That electronic delivery systems are further advanced and there is a high 
level of experimental joint venture projects with private sector backing. 
However, there is still a large gulf between the few pioneers and the 
vast mass of institutions in the system.

The position of the 'library professional' is under threat. Ellen 
Detlefsen has surveyed recent staff advertisements10 and has found that 
the library qualification is not necessarily preferred for posts with a 
strong disciplinary based subject content for technical jobs such as 
planning IT strategies, and for senior management roles.

There is general awareness that the boundaries of jobs within the library 
are very fluid. Anne Woodsworth writes of an 'information job family'11 
in which there are sufficient similarities between some computing and 
library jobs to merit similar job classifications. 'Para-professionals' 
are widely taking on functions previously performed by 'professionals'.12

The role of the middle grade 'professional' is becoming much more 
challenging. Some use terms such as 'partnership' with the academic and 
cite mastery of 'process knowledge', others highlight new roles of 
'coach/facilitator for decision-making'.

Financial pressures and the vast disparity between institutional 
resources have made it easier for the philosophy of 'access not holdings' 
to be adopted by many smaller institutions. Where this happens, there 
seems to be a readiness to enter into contractual associations or 
arrangements for document or fax supply with larger libraries in the 
region. 

3.6All the trends noted above echo those in the UK with the same vast 
range of practice and it is thus easy to argue that we are in a very 
similar position and have little to learn, apart from the experience of a 
few pioneering IT projects.

3.7The Australian picture is better documented from the national 
viewpoint because of the 'Ross Report' in 199013, which was similar to 
the current Review. This study looked very broadly at library provision 
and generated recommendations for the Federal Government, for the Vice 
Chancellors' Committee and for individual institutions. A key contextual 
point is that institutions give their libraries a much larger share of 
their budget (an average of 8%) than in the UK. The Report suggested 
Federal funding for promoting cooperative and consortia projects. Its 
recommendations to institutions included advice that:

Graduates should not be charged for any data base searches or ILLs.

Those institutions with opening hours of less than 75 per week should 
review this with their users.

2% of salaries should be set aside for staff training, but this included 
earmarking a national training levy of 1.5%.

All should participate in regional networks.

3.8The Ross Report gave little space to staffing implications, but its 
few comments have some echoes in the UK. There was a feeling that initial 
education was inadequate in its coverage of planning, management and 
organisational issues. There were demands for new types of skills, 
technically in handling automation and academically in subject terms: 
"There is now a growing appreciation of the need for a wider range of 
subject specialists able to work with relevant academic departments" 
(paragraph 4.7.3). The bulk of its comment on staff relates to staff 
development and it calls for an integrated staff development programme 
for all levels of staff, with much of the provision met through 
structured training. There are also interesting suggestions for staff 
exchange schemes and involvement in extramural professional work (with 
publishers or industry) as an element in individuals' staff development 
programmes.

3.9Derek Law's report to the Management Sub Group on his visit to some 
Australian libraries in January 1993 identified many of the same issues 
as in the UK and the USA: organisational convergence, self service issue 
terminals (from which no staff savings are expected), and a growing 
interest in electronic document delivery as an alternative to the journal 
cost spiral.

3.10Following the Ross Report, the training levy was implemented and 
Federal networks were established; in addition, all Australian 
institutions were expected to review their future strategies. One such 
impressive document, "Prospect 2001", produced by the University of 
Wollongong, is unusual because of its attention to the people element in 
future change. It considers that "library staff have a pivotal role in 
the identification of appropriate information technology and in teaching 
members of the university to use it properly". In order to do this it 
questions the present skills of library staff and also the structures 
within which they work; a team or project approach to work is recommended 
(cf. paragraph 2.36). One wide-ranging paragraph on human resource 
management issues foreshadows much of what we will be discussing in 
Chapter 4: "It is expected that current job classifications within the 
Library will alter as a result of award restructuring, the introduction 
of multiskilling and changes in the perceptions of the skills expected to 
be performed by particular types of staff. A considerable shift will 
occur in the duties expected of para-professional staff and all staff 
will acquire competency in a broader range of skills". 

3.11Again, our conclusion from the Australian experience is that 
there are many common problems and solutions, but we have identified no 
innovative programmes which might help the UK.  

Predictions about current trends and possible future models

3.12Our Steering Committee helped us to make the following assumptions 
about the extent of change by the year 2000:

Organisational convergence will continue to take place, but it will be 
driven largely by personal and political factors within each institution.

A move towards greater operational convergence will be universal in some 
functions. For example, all institutions will produce integrated library 
and information service strategic plans and all will manage their 
networks jointly. Almost all will provide joint information literacy 
training for customers. Many, but not perhaps the majority, will combine 
front-line enquiry desk jobs so that one person handles initial questions 
on computing and library matters. The scale of this will be influenced 
more by location of the two services and new building layouts rather than 
by policy factors. Where learning resource centres are constructed with a 
high ratio of terminals to carrels/desks, it is inevitable that 
'converged' enquiries will arise.

Staff number growth will take place principally in the para-professional 
and clerical grades and these two categories will continue to take over 
tasks which hitherto have been performed by professionals.

Networked access to LIS will be universal and a full range of CD-ROMS and 
BIDS-type services will be available to all on the system. In addition 
all the smaller libraries or resource centres will have established 
document delivery or borrowing arrangements (on a paid contractual basis) 
with larger libraries in their region. All university networks will offer 
access to resource catalogues of nearby institutions.

Opening hours and services will continue to develop to meet customers' 
needs and the growing number of part time and distance learning students 
will expect full service to match that given to full time students. There 
will be more instances of 24 hour 7 day service offered by fully 
converged centres. Where the requirements of students to have access to 
appropriate technology 'around the clock' will be a major driving force, 
institutions will have negotiated new conditions of service and staff 
flexibility to make this possible.

Professional staff will be expected to play a greater role in learner 
support (which we define below) and their liaison role with academic 
departments will become central to their functions. Thus, a new form of 
convergence, which we call 'academic convergence' will gradually develop.

3.13Given that the present range of practice is so diverse, not even 
confinable within LISU's six categories, an obvious question is whether 
this diversity will continue. Related to this, in predicting the future, 
is the issue raised by SCONUL in its submission to the Review Group. Is 
it reasonable to conclude "that what will emerge will be not one, but 
several, models of an academic library, requiring different patterns of 
resource and with different service objectives"? We shall now consider 
this because if different models are identifiable they would require 
different staffing structures and skills mixes.

3.14How might one distinguish or categorize different models of a 
future university library/information service? There are several possible 
key factors, which are not mutually exclusive:

By mission or broad strategy: some large research libraries will wish to 
continue that role; some smaller universities might decide that their LIS 
function has a teaching support role only; others might limit this 
further and focus on multiple copies or the provision of locally produced 
study packs/learning resources. 

By commitment to operational convergence: the scale of integration of the 
enquiry/help desk functions and the physical merger of networked 
terminals in library carrels must, almost inevitably, lead to a 
convergence of roles of staff in buildings where this applies.

By investment in fully networked systems offering electronic access to 
all users to text and databases. This will not necessarily be a universal 
solution for cost reasons.  At some stage the rising costs of offering 
open access to networks - and the consequent supply of text - will force 
institutions to consider charging systems for student use. 

3.15There are other critical influences on the way a 
library/information service is organised and run which affect the roles 
that staff would have:

Multiple sites have advantages and disadvantages: they help to provide a 
convenient customer focus, where the library serves a faculty or school, 
and they offer individual staff a broader range of tasks than in a single 
site location; however, they may be less efficient when it comes to 
providing specialist services which all 
site-based people cannot provide, and it can be harder to achieve a 
common culture within the LIS function and standards of service may vary 
between sites.

Some managerial styles can achieve changes in circumstances which defeat 
other approaches. It has been clear from our visits that, as in all 
organisations, individual leaders with vision and good luck can transform 
previously unresponsive, hidebound libraries/information services.

The institution's growth pattern in terms of new courses, student numbers 
and changes in postgraduate or research priorities will dramatically 
influence the work of the subject librarian and the scale and quality of 
the service which can be offered. This link raises policy issues which 
are not always identified and answered by the LIS strategic plan or even 
by the institution. We return to this point later in this Chapter.

The size of the institution and its LIS are crucial factors. In the small 
colleges of higher education we visited the combination of size (which 
restricted the numbers of 'professionals') and historical development 
(which had frequently led to an integrated learning resources centre) was 
the dominant influence on staff roles.

3.16One logical expectation from this analysis is that we might be 
able to arrive at an agreed set of models and could then suggest that 
Type A institution needed one set of people skills, while Type B needed 
another. Unfortunately, we do not believe this is a feasible approach, as 
the range of likely models will be too large when all the factors and 
influences are taken into account. 

3.17We prefer to adopt an alternative approach, which is to look at 
the roles of individuals within the future system and to ask how these 
will change. Before doing so, we will first consider an area of activity 
where we expect a new form of convergence to develop: 'academic 
convergence' through learner support.

Learner support: what is it?

3.18The term 'learner support' is used outside libraries to refer to 
the general non-subject specific help with learning provided by a range 
of people such as administrators and technicians. A useful description of 
the different way support can be given has been described in The A-Z of 
Open Learning14. 'Help available to a learner in addition to learning 
materials. Such support was often inadequate in schemes of correspondence 
study but from its inception the OU stressed the facilitating role of 
tutors and counsellors and also encouraged learners themselves to form 
self-help groups... an exciting feature of current open learning is the 
use of a variety of types and modes of support ... the help can be varied 
to include: encouragement, counselling, assessment, feedback, advice, 
access to learning experiences and can be provided by a variety of means 
including face to face, post and telephone.'

3.19In the academic library context 'learner support' is taken to 
mean a variety of things. Responses to the LISU questionnaire showed that 
LIS staff are confused. Since we believe that the term covers an area 
that will be central to the future role of many library staff, it is 
important to have a clear understanding of what it means.

3.20We prefer a wide-ranging definition: 'the activities within 
library/information services that exist to support individual learners'. 
Since this covers such a range of functions, some further framework or 
classification has to be found, if we are to understand what learner 
support really is.

3.21We suggest that it might be helpful to regard learner support in 
the LIS context as embracing a grid of activities along two matrices, one 
relating to the support skills and competences needed (whether LIS or 
academic) and the other to the style of support (whether structured or 
unstructured). In this context we define structured as a formal 
interaction with an individual or a group in which there is a planned 
approach, while unstructured learning is not bound by a plan and responds 
to the needs of the learners. We illustrate this in Figure I, where we 
show where existing activities fit within the framework definition of 
learner support we have suggested.

3.22If this matrix approach is followed, the activities, which all 
involve LIS staff interacting with students, can be placed in appropriate 
areas:

Library user education, as delivered in the traditional, technical manner 
with large guided tours, handbooks, large group talks is an obvious fit 
in the top left, as it is structured and requires LIS skills.

User education in information skills and information management is less 
easy to classify, as it is an area where the skills of the LIS person and 
the academic need to overlap; in style it is usually delivered in a 
structured manner. Where subject librarians contribute to a specific 
study skills programme devised by a school or faculty, the activity may 
well be in the academic competences half of the matrix. 

Mediated access to databases is a more technical form of LIS support, on 
a one to one basis, in which the "supporter" takes a formal instructional 
role and there is little or no tutorial content. It therefore usually 
fits in the top left.

Tailored navigational support is the term the IT Sub Group of the Follett 
Committee has coined to describe the help given by information librarians 
with subject specific knowledge to staff or students helping them to get 
to (and then to use) the most appropriate electronic databases in their 
subject. The core skills are those of the LIS person, but as this 
function develops and the number of databases proliferates, it will 
become more specialised and linked to awareness of the academic content. 
On our matrix we place the function across the structured/unstructured 
divide, and straddling the LIS/academic competences line.

Mediation with learners' library-based tasks embraces help with study 
packs, computer-based teaching materials and open learning resource 
packs. Some of these require structured intervention and some do not, but 
help may nonetheless be sought. As learners increasingly use the library 
to work on these materials, LIS staff are likely to be asked to provide 
support of a kind that requires an understanding of how people learn. It 
is not clear whether this kind of support role needs any knowledge of the 
academic subject matter, although it will need some of the tutorial 
skills of the 'academic' in providing effective help. We place this task 
in the unstructured category and nudging into academic from LIS skills. 
An interesting analogy can be made with two posts which have recently 
been advertised in the University of Humberside in the area of support to 
teaching and learning resources: the incumbents are expected to 
"contribute at a strategic level to the development and provision of 
teaching and learning support strategies".

Tutorial support is traditionally a wholly academic preserve, thus placed 
in the bottom right segment of our diagram. It is a moot point whether 
help given by subject librarians with qualifications in a relevant field 
(such as engineering for example) can be classed as tutorial support.  

3.23Using this matrix, we can classify any kind of learner support 
in the LIS context and can also review the way it is currently being 
staffed. The more LIS tasks begin to group on the right hand side of the 
matrix, the more we can speculate that 'academic convergence' is 
beginning to take place. This means in effect that the roles of the 
information/subject librarian and academic staff are coming together. 

Figure 1: Types of Learner Support

Some individual roles in the future LIS

3.24The main burden of change is expected to fall on three groups of 
LIS staff: the senior managers, the subject or information librarians and 
the library assistants. We outline our assumptions about each as a basis 
for making recommendations in the next Chapter about initial training, 
staff development and appraisal.

3.25Senior Managers. It is already clear that the management of 
libraries is becoming complex both politically and technically in a time 
of declining resources and rapidly increasing demand. It is no longer 
realistic to assume that only library or IS 'professionals' can manage 
the LIS service, nor can one deny that other professional skills such as 
accountancy and human resource management will be needed at senior 
levels. Thus, all but 11 of the 161 replies to LISU said that they wanted 
some, or a lot more, specialist IT help in running their operations and 
60% needed more accountancy assistance. Detlefsen's analysis of American 
recruitment advertisements confirms that managerial qualities and 
experience rather than professional skills are the principal requirements 
for senior positions15. This same trend will emerge in the UK in view of 
the need for high level management skills. We also believe that, whereas 
appointments of senior staff have tended to be on the assumption that the 
incumbent would stay for life, more positions will be offered on short 
term contracts with favourable salaries to attract the right managerial 
skills.

3.26Subject or Information Librarians. On our visits there was a 
wider range of practice in the role of the subject or information 
librarian (where it existed) than in any other post. In some places the 
title described someone who worked in the library with responsibility for 
the ordering, classification and cataloguing of books in a group of 
subjects, but who had little interaction with academic staff, except on 
the topic of ordering books. A second interpretation of the role involved 
close working with academic colleagues in a wide range of support 
activities and therefore tended to the 'academic convergence' model we 
have described above. A third interpretation of the role was the 
recognised researcher in a subject area who had virtual equivalence with 
academic peers. This tended to be found in larger research institutions 
with special collections. As we believe that the second interpretation is 
the direction in which the role will develop 
further, we describe what we think the component 
elements are:

Attending course planning committees to advise on the design of courses 
and the support which the LIS could provide. On occasions this advice 
might adopt the style "Why don't you teach it this way and then the 
Library could help you with ....?"

Providing tuition (and setting and marking the relevant 
tests/examinations) on study skills programmes run by departments or 
faculties/schools, relating to the resources available in the subject 
area and how to access them.

Participating in academic audit and quality assurance initiatives to 
review the LIS contribution to particular courses through student 
feedback and other means and suggesting ways in which a university's 
resources could contribute more to the quality of learning.

Helping academic staff either informally or formally (through 
participation in a university's staff development programme) to 
understand the resources that are available, physically and 
electronically, as well as the teaching/learning approaches to adopt to 
make the best use of them.

Providing technical support for staff and students through advice on how 
to get to, and through, the electronic text and databases that are most 
relevant to the subject (described earlier as 'tailored navigational 
support'). An application of this at the University of Hull is described 
in a recent article, which portrays the librarian's roles as "acting as 
both a gatekeeper of information and as a trainer/tutor for end-users"16. 
Performing this function effectively, particularly in a research library, 
will involve keeping up-to-date with such systems world-wide within the 
subject area.

Assisting students with any technical or access problems when they are in 
the Library or Resource Centre; this could involve any of the resources 
in the Centre, such as video or open learning materials. Such help might 
tend towards the role of 'tutorial support' in Figure I.

Producing (or coordinating the production of) educational material, in a 
range of formats, that informs staff and students about resources in 
their subject area.

3.27The functions described above form a daunting job description 
with a mix of technical and human skills. It would be difficult to 
undertake them for more than a very small number of schools or faculties. 
In research libraries we would expect the mix of tasks to be biased 
towards those serving academic staff, such as assistance with tailored 
navigational support to subject specific databases needed for research.

3.28Library Assistants. It has already been noted that we expect the 
continuation of the trend whereby work done by 'professionals' is 
increasingly performed by assistants. If subject librarians' functions do 
develop as described above, they will need to free themselves of as many 
routine operations as possible. Thus, the library assistants' roles will 
be 'up-skilled', a trend which will be helped by the increasing graduate 
entry to the job, as the number of graduates in the national job market 
increases.

3.29Employing graduates in jobs which have a high routine element to 
them can have risks and management will need to be alert to this. Job 
enrichment solutions could be found in the project or working party 
approach referred to in paragraph 2.36. Another approach is to create 
subject-based teams of a subject/information librarian with library 
assistant(s); this will happen naturally in institutions with split 
sites, but it could also be a positive team-building feature where 
geography does not dictate it.

3.30The wider range of tasks expected from library assistants in the 
future has obvious implications for the scale and coverage of training, 
which we cover in Chapter 4. Recruitment criteria for the posts will need 
to take into account the ability of the individual to grow in terms of 
skills and competences.

Future strategies

3.31Conditions are right for a reappraisal of the place of LIS in a 
university's strategic priorities. Recent research by the Centre for 
Higher Education Studies at the Institute of Education, University of 
London, shows that there is a widespread backing for more resources to be 
allocated to academic support services17. A poll of students, staff and 
administrators revealed that all three cited more spending on books, 
materials and equipment as the top priority if the quality of teaching 
was to be improved. (In the case of academic staff they voted to give 
'increasing staff numbers' equal ranking.)

3.32Elsewhere in the Group's Report Review there is a firm 
recommendation that universities set very clear strategies for their LIS 
activities and define what is expected from them. We strongly endorse 
this proposal because we noticed on our visits that, although many 
libraries had prepared strategic plans, many were still unable to answer 
questions about their overall policy and objectives; for example, some 
were not sure to what extent they were a 'research' library, nor what the 
implications were if they were. A compromise approach we found was to 
match the library's acquisitions policy (and budgets) to the university 
research selectivity rankings by focusing resources for journals more on 
departments with rankings in grades 4 and 5. Such a policy should be 
endorsed within an institutional strategy. The other area where a strong 
link with institutional policy is vital is that of information systems, 
in the broadest sense. However effective 'operational convergence' is in 
this context, it is little use if it is not firmly rooted in the 
university's long term IS strategy.  We recommend that all heads of LIS 
work closely within the senior management of their institution to prepare 
strategic plans which define clearly the role of the service and its 
interactions with the institution's IS strategies.

3.33Strategic plans must take people into account. The MSC/NEDO 
project "People - the Key to Success"18 put it succinctly: "very often, 
in making their plans for the future, organisations don't give enough 
thought to the preparation and development of their people...Those who 
lead organisations are used to setting objectives. They are used to 
thinking ahead. But how many plans include people, other than the 
staffing required at a managerial level? And how many organisations 
market their plans as sensitively to those they employ as they do their 
products to their customers?" We recommend that, when universities 
prepare strategic plans for their LIS, they should also consciously plan 
for the people who will put the plans into effect. This has implications 
for the head of LIS who will need to give particular attention to the 
Human Resource Management (HRM) implications of those staff involved in 
the learner support role. One aspect of this relates to the boundaries of 
their role with academic staff. We therefore recommend that LIS strategic 
plans should review the changing roles of LIS staff and, where there is 
an extension of the learner support role, the boundaries of LIS 
responsibility should be agreed with the relevant academic staff member 
responsible.

3.34The MSC/NEDO report suggested that there were three 
characteristics that successful organisations should expect to find in 
their people: competence to do the jobs needed, commitment to the 
organisation and its objectives and a capacity to change as circumstances 
and needs require. In the following Chapter we explore how these can be 
achieved. 

4 Human Resource Management

Introduction

4.1The Fender Report called for a human resource management perspective 
in the face of numerous criticisms of the ways that universities have 
managed their staff in the past, and concluded: "the study group believes 
that the term 'personnel management' should be replaced by the more wide 
ranging 'human resource management' with its emphasis on people as a 
resource and not just a means". We broadly agree with these sentiments, 
and this chapter which reviews some of the key issues facing the staffing 
of libraries/information services is written from an HRM viewpoint.

4.2In adopting such a perspective we have already noted that all 
universities will need to think strategically about the future roles and 
organisation of library/information services in relation to the changing 
needs of both their users and the environment, and then adopt appropriate 
employment and other policies for their people. As Armstrong (1988)19 has 
noted: "HRM is a strategic approach to the acquisition, motivation, 
development and management of the organisation's human resources. It is 
devoted to shaping an appropriate corporate culture, and introducing 
programmes which reflect and support the core values of the enterprise 
and ensure its success. HRM is proactive rather than reactive, ie always 
looking forward to what needs to be done and then doing it, rather than 
waiting to be told what to do - about recruiting, paying or training 
people or dealing with employee relations problems as they arise." In a 
number of interviews critical comments were made about individual 
universities having failed in the past to take such a perspective, 
resulting in unclear library priorities and a consequent lack of 
coherence about staffing issues. Thus, we hope that many institutions 
will take a more strategic view of library/information management than in 
the past. It is very clear that LIS staff will all need the capacity to 
change referred to in paragraph 3.34 above, if their service is to meet 
the demands expected of it.

The current position on staffing grades and conditions of service

4.3The existing situation concerning employment structures and 
conditions of service in university libraries is confused, with two main 
national systems operating with considerable local variation. The large 
majority of 'old' universities have operated a system which distinguishes 
between so-called 'academic-related' posts and those that are 'clerically 
graded'. The former have largely been used for those staff with at least 
a first degree undertaking so-called 'professional' roles, as defined by 
the nature of the duties required rather than by the possession of 
professional qualifications. The latter staff are filling so-called 'non' 
or 'para' professional roles even though some individuals may have 
professional qualifications or degrees. Whilst the contractual position 
of the latter group tends to be the same as for all other clerical staff 
within the 'old' universities, some variation is found in the contractual 
positions of the former group. Frequently, staff will have contracts 
almost identical to those of academic staff, in some cases retaining 
tenure. Similarly, considerable variations exist on issues such as 
whether any hours of work or holiday entitlements are specified, whether 
staff are members of academic decision making bodies (eg: Senates), and 
so on. The background to this current situation and the implications for 
existing 'para-professional' staff are well described in Baker (1986)20. 
Significant criticisms of this division between academic-related and 
clerical staff were made to us during interviews and in responses to the 
LISU questionnaire.

4.4Clerical staff in the 'old' universities occupying positions such as 
library assistants and so on are generally graded on posts evaluated 
under a six grade UCNS scheme. This system has been in operation for some 
years and has been widely criticised by university personnel officers. A 
revised scheme based on factor analysis is currently being tried in some 
institutions, although it has not yet been agreed formally between 
employers and trade unions at national levels. 

4.5In the 'new' universities and colleges of higher education a more 
complex picture exists, with the governing body of each institution 
having the right to determine the pay and conditions of service of its 
own staff, although national machinery does exist to make 
recommendations. The majority of library staff are on APT&C grades, 
although a very small number of institutions have adopted their own 
grading systems, but there are considerable variations on how 
'professional' staff are treated. In a small number of cases such staff 
have retained previous academic contracts (including in some cases the 
right to self-managed research time); in other cases staff have retained 
their original academic salary but have moved to APT&C conditions of 
service; whilst in others all contractual aspects are now based on APT&C 
arrangements except for senior staff where individual contracts may be in 
operation. A similar pattern is to be found amongst staff in audio visual 
units and other groups that are being converged with libraries. In both 
sectors the increasing complexity of managing libraries has given rise to 
a growth in the number of additional specialists (for example, 
accountants and technical staff), sometimes on different - although 
related - salary scales. Hourly paid staff - often students - are 
increasingly used for routine tasks such as shelf stacking.

4.6Information from both the library review questionnaire and the 
visits we made to individual institutions highlighted a major concern 
about flexibility of working arrangements relating to some staff, 
particularly but not exclusively those 'academic-related' staff in 'old' 
universities. Indeed, approximately 40% of respondents to the 
questionnaire indicated that they did not have local agreements (on 
hours, flexibility etc.) to help improve services to users. In addition, 
we were given a number of examples where middle-level library staff with 
significant length of service were felt to be the main obstacles to much-
needed changes in library practices. One frequently cited example was the 
need for flexible working with time off in lieu to cover extended opening 
hours in the evenings or at weekends. Institutional responses to the 
questionnaire together with responses during interviews indicate that in 
most of the 'new' universities contractual flexibility exists to ensure 
that 'professional' staff roles can be worked as reasonably required by 
management. In contrast, we were told that in some (but by no means all) 
of the older universities it has apparently proved impossible in practice 
to obtain any real flexibility at all, with 'professional' staff 
effectively working only during normal office hours. Whether this is 
because of contractual restrictions, or just traditional 'custom and 
practice', is difficult to determine other than in individual cases. In 
future such flexibility of contractual positions will be required for 
effective working, and all libraries/information services will have to 
develop employment policies which allow for flexible working patterns 
covering seven days a week with extended opening hours.

4.7One particular aspect of flexibility of working arrangements 
concerns the extent to which LIS staff have written job descriptions 
which specify the main duties to be undertaken. Data from the LISU 
questionnaire suggests that whilst the overwhelming majority of 'non-
professional' staff posts have written job descriptions (more than 90%), 
only approximately 65% of 'professional' posts have them, with a smaller 
figure still of 50% for so-called ancillary posts. Whilst recognising 
that over-detailed or poorly drafted job descriptions do contain some 
dangers of subsequent inflexibility in interpretation of duties (leading 
at least one LIS service to avoid their use deliberately for all 
categories of staff), we nonetheless feel that the creation of job 
descriptions is generally desirable and it is therefore disappointing to 
see relatively large numbers of 'professional' staff without them. The 
reasons for this are unclear, but we suspect that in the 'old' 
universities there may have been reluctance in some cases to introduce 
job descriptions to staff on academic-related contracts.

4.8Although contracts and conditions of service were controversial 
items frequently raised with us during meetings, the question of pay 
itself was not, and in general levels of pay appeared appropriate in 
enabling institutions to recruit the calibre of staff required. Generally 
most institutions operate pay systems related to the salary guides of the 
respective scales, but some institutional variations are practised, and 
in some small higher education colleges low salaries are paid for both 
clerical and professionally qualified staff. Local variations in pay are 
likely to continue to develop in line with local labour market 
conditions, and these may result in a slight reduction in staff costs in 
many institutions, depending upon the staffing profile. Performance 
related pay (PRP) is not widespread and exists in only two main forms: 
for heads of services and other senior staff in most of the 'new' 
universities, and through the availability of discretionary payments for 
academic-related staff in the 'old' universities. Within the sector as a 
whole there appears to be little enthusiasm for PRP, which is widely 
perceived to be potentially in opposition to the desired growth of 
teamwork. Clearly, if institutions are required to extend PRP (either 
because of their own policies or due to external pressures) systems will 
have to be designed with some care to maintain credibility with everyone 
concerned.

Changes in staffing patterns and competences needed

4.9As Chapters 2 and 3 have shown, notable changes in staffing patterns 
for all library staff have become evident in the last few years, and 
moves towards the electronic information service are likely to speed up 
future changes in the duties, roles and responsibilities of some staff. 

4.10There is a clear perception in some university libraries that 
pressures on staff and associated financial constraints have caused the 
quality of services offered to users to decline, but this view is not 
shared by all respondents to the LISU questionnaire nor by all our 
interviewees. The range of views on this issue can be seen in the 
following responses to the questionnaire: for example, 13% identified 
increased staffing and staff development as a valuable achievement in the 
past five years, although only 2% of the 'old' universities cited this 
aspect as an achievement, as compared to 20% of education and general 
colleges. However, so far as the future is concerned, 41% of respondents 
envisaged staffing costs to be one of their most significant problems 
over the next five years, and this figure was reflected relatively evenly 
across most categories of institution. (The highest figure was 60% of 
education and general colleges, 39% of 'old' universities, 38% of 
specialist colleges, and 34% of 'new' universities.) In this context 11% 
of respondents positively identified aspects of staffing levels and staff 
development as being worthwhile areas of support over the next five 
years. Such data clearly require additional analysis and could be 
explained by numerous factors, some of which were identified in Chapters 
2 and 3. However, whilst highlighting potential staffing problems in the 
future for some institutions, it does not present convincing evidence for 
remedial action for all institutions. Rather it suggests that the 
difficulties faced by institutions need to be examined on an individual 
basis.

4.11The workforce within libraries remains predominantly female, and 
this raises a number of questions in relation to institutional HRM 
practices, including equal opportunities, fair promotion and reward 
practices, maternity and childcare provisions, and, increasingly, a 
concern over personal security outside 9-5 opening hours. As institutions 
move towards greater flexibility in forms of contract and conditions of 
service, care will have to be taken to ensure that such issues are 
effectively addressed.

4.12We got the impression from our discussions that career paths 
within academic libraries/information services have become increasingly 
restricted, although statistical evidence on this point is not available. 
We understand that for 'professional' staff promotion between 
institutions has slowed down very considerably, and internally very 
limited promotion prospects exist. Amongst 'para-professional' staff the 
artificial restrictions on the promotion to 'professional' posts, even 
where candidates are qualified by competence - although not perhaps by 
formal qualifications - has reportedly led to a reduction in staff 
morale, and an exacerbation of 'them and us' attitudes between the two 
groups of staff in a number of the 'old' universities. The combination of 
a reduction of career opportunities and financial pressures has led to 
some calls for 'new blood' posts within libraries, which we consider 
below.

4.13The areas where the competences of existing staff will be most 
challenged in future and where new sets of skills will be required can be 
deduced from the analysis in the preceding chapters. There are four key 
areas of change:

A major para-academic role for staff, described in paragraph 3.26, as the 
initial mediators and facilitators of resource-based open learning, with 
responsibilities for first-line instruction and supervision of students. 
In library/information services that have a predominantly teaching 
orientation it is likely that the roles of current subject librarians 
might well move to encompass the provision of open learning. Indeed, a 
few institutions have recently started to appoint staff to roles which 
will facilitate the introduction of such initiatives. Such roles will 
require staff to develop new competences and skills which in turn will 
need to be built into revised job descriptions and grading systems. The 
existing boundaries between academic departments and LIS may change with 
a movement of staff from the former into the latter in order to help with 
delivery of open learning. Because of the extensive work being undertaken 
on National Vocational Qualifications (see the end of this Chapter) we 
have not sought to duplicate the consideration of such competences, and 
later make recommendations on how universities might apply such work to 
their own needs in the area of enhancing the support for student 
learning.

The changes in work and organisation brought about by new technology and 
information systems. It is clear that all subject/information librarians 
will be expected to master 'navigational skills' to get through 
electronic databases and to show others how to do so. This will be a 
particularly demanding task for staff in research libraries, who will be 
expected to maintain a specialist knowledge of databases. Equally, all 
library assistants, as tasks get passed down the line, will be required 
to have greater awareness of how to access databases, electronic text and 
CD-ROMs. They are already being asked for help in these matters by 
students. The report of the information technology sub-group of the 
Libraries Review stresses the management development implications of 
these changes, as there is already a considerable unmet need for 
specialist technical training. LIS staff are also being expected to 
master the basic office skills of word processing and spread sheet 
applications.

The greater focus on delivering a system more responsive to the needs of 
customers leads to a need for more sensitive delivery of services. 
Programmes of customer care training and handling of people will be 
fundamental to the way the LIS is regarded within the institution. Whilst 
many libraries have been in the forefront of developments in this area, 
much progress still remains to be made. Services in many institutions are 
unnecessarily restricted, facilities for part-time students are often 
poor, and the move to a converged service is likely to see demands for 
the library/information service to be open for more extended hours, 
perhaps eventually 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The successful move to 
this style of operation will obviously raise resource implications, but 
will also be a challenge to the attitudes and assumptions of many current 
staff.

Achieving these and other changes will require new forms of operation and 
organisation within services with a greater emphasis on team working and 
less on traditional hierarchical forms of working found in some of the 
larger 'old' universities. These new forms of management should aim to 
build commitment to the organisation and its objectives (see paragraph 
3.34). If people have this, they are more willing to come up with 
creative, positive ideas for managing change. Such changes in style could 
present major challenges and threats to some existing senior or middle 
grade staff: for them extensive training and support may be required to 
enable them to manage such change effectively; and for new posts existing 
selection procedures will have to be tightened in order to ensure that 
candidates with appropriate skills and attitudes are appointed.

Initial training

4.14Two issues concerned with initial training for academic 
libraries/information services are directly relevant to this study:

First, the suitability of the library schools' preparation of students 
for academic libraries, at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, 
was raised in a number of interviews. The issues go beyond the terms of 
reference of this study, but include the appropriateness of parts of the 
curriculum, the possible over-pursuit of qualifications by staff who 
would not subsequently be in a position to put the skills gained into 
practice (thus leading to reduced motivation), and the possible need for 
rationalisation in the number of schools offering an option in academic 
librarianship due to marginal demand. These issues are not new, and we 
understand that individual schools have made effective links with 
individual LIS managers on many of these points; however, formal national 
discussions between the library schools and academic library 
practitioners are needed and these appear to have been slow to get off 
the ground. Accordingly, we recommend that COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG should 
review the initial training needs of LIS staff and hold formal 
discussions with BAILER, building on the detailed operational links that 
exist. 

Second, the possible introduction of National Vocational Qualifications 
(NVQs) has implications for library schools, and this should also be 
discussed by COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG and BAILER but within the context of our 
recommendations on NVQs later in this report.

4.15 Other developments discussed in this report will also affect 
library schools, including the need for enhanced training in management 
skills, and the need to train staff in the support of open learning and 
other 'learner support' competences.

4.16The roles of professional associations in the education, 
training, and certification of staff is a regular topic of discussion 
within academic libraries, with a variety of institutional policies in 
operation. Some universities encourage staff to become members of the 
appropriate professional body (usually either the Library Association or 
the Institute of Information Scientists), while others have no policy. 
Such an issue might usefully be clarified in the training and development 
policy of individual institutions. A more specific concern raised with us 
in some interviews was about professionally qualified staff (in terms of 
memberships of the professional associations) filling posts that did not 
involve duties perceived to be 'professional'. However, views were mixed, 
and, whilst critics of the process felt it to be contributing to the 
undermining of the profession, others felt it to be an entirely suitable 
way of starting a library career in the difficult employment conditions 
of today. Our recommendations below on contractual issues may go some way 
to resolving this issue.

New blood appointments and innovative staffing proposals

4.17As noted above, calls have been made within the library sector 
for a number of 'new blood' appointments which are thought to have the 
following advantages: improving the age profile of staff; introducing new 
staff into the learning environment with up-to-date experience and 
interests; and injecting fresh life into library operations and assisting 
with the process of managing change. There are two main questions: first, 
whether a widespread 'new blood' initiative is required for the sector as 
a whole; and second, whether a smaller amount of funding for limited 
restructuring to meet specific institutional problems would be 
preferable. 

4.18Whilst some individual libraries clearly continue to suffer from 
a range of staffing problems, it is by no means obvious that the causes 
are the same in all cases. Moreover, although answers to the LISU 
questionnaire highlight concerns over possible staffing problems in the 
next five years for many institutions, these do not appear to be true of 
the whole system. Thus, we do not recommend any support for 'new blood' 
appointments. Our specific reasons are as follows: 

First, we believe that many library/information services have yet to take 
the major policy decisions about future roles and organisation of 
services that would be required before a realistic case for 'new blood' 
appointments could be made, and the absence in many institutions of 
strategic HRM planning has already been noted.

Second, there are many examples of institutions who are effectively 
addressing the staffing issues raised in this report without such 
additional external funding for new posts. 

Third, the effective management of staff resources is a crucial 
institutional responsibility, and the appointment of 'new blood' staff is 
all too often an excuse for institutions not to manage their own affairs 
appropriately. 

Fourth, for many institutions we believe that a higher priority is to 
achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness from increasing the 
flexibility of current staff in posts.

4.19However, it is important for universities to be flexible and 
innovative in their approaches to staffing and providing LIS services; it 
is acknowledged that some institutions may wish to develop new forms of 
staff support, either individually or in a consortium, which do not fit 
within their institution's budgetary plans. Some of these posts may 
provide useful models for other institutions to follow. We therefore 
believe that there is a good case for the provision of national funding 
for the short term for innovative staffing proposals which might be 
adopted throughout the sector. Accordingly, we recommend that the Funding 
Councils should consider establishing an LIS Innovation Fund which would, 
inter alia, provide short term support for innovative staff posts created 
to serve either one or a group of institutions. The Fund, which is 
described further in paragraph 4.46, would be used solely for staffing 
and training purposes and would not duplicate any recommendations of the 
information technology sub-group. It would finance innovations in the 
areas of additional staffing support, pump priming enhanced training and 
development as part of a restructuring and management of change strategy, 
management training for managers within the LIS framework and the 
development of open learning training materials for use within LIS 
services. These issues are discussed in more detail in later sections. 
However, the existence of such a Fund is not intended to be a substitute 
for institutional action, and before universities could receive funds 
from the Councils they would have to demonstrate to an impartial 
committee or panel that the proposed innovations were set within a clear 
and rigorous strategic planning framework which included human resource 
as well as financial considerations.  
 
Contracts and conditions of service

4.20We have described above in paragraph 4.3 the distinction in the 
'old' universities between 'academic-related' staff and other grades. 
Although there are advantages to the distinction (most notably the 
theoretical parity of esteem between academic and library staff), there 
are numerous disadvantages:

The creation of a 'them and us' attitude in some institutions.

Unnecessary and artificial boundaries between 'professional' and 'para 
professional' work.

A lack of flexibility which can inhibit efficiency.
The lack of promotion opportunities for clerical staff beyond the 
top of their grades. 

An inhibiting effect to the greater delegation of responsibility to 
clerical staff, thus also reducing the opportunities for 'upskilling'.

4.21We therefore believe that the distinctions between these two 
current categories of staff should be less rigid and become much more 
flexible. We propose three possible courses of action:

first, and perhaps most controversially, we believe that all universities 
should consider adopting for library/information services an integrated 
grading system. In order to provide the data for such a system more 
detailed investigations of the alternative courses of action will be 
required. This proposal would mean that, whilst salaries equivalent to 
academic levels could be retained, conditions of service for LIS staff 
would probably change and, in general, would no longer be automatically 
related to academic conditions of service. 

Second, those 'para-professionals' who wish to should be able to apply 
for promotion on the basis of their performance, notwithstanding the 
absence of formal academic or professional qualifications. Where an 
institution thought the possession of such qualifications was necessary, 
these could be obtained either through an NVQ framework (see the section 
below) or through alternative approaches.

Third, we propose that the term 'professional' as applied to a particular 
grade of staff be abolished: its use in this sense within institutions is 
unnecessarily divisive and often obstructs teamwork. LIS managers should 
aim to ensure that all staff achieve the highest standards of 
professionalism in their services to customers of all kinds. In many 
cases this will involve them in obtaining qualifications from the 
relevant professional bodies.

4.22We recognise that there are at least three possible objections 
to this proposal: the perceived threat to a currently all-graduate 
profession; the views of the professional associations about the 
desirability of chartered status; and the views of members of staff who 
now have academic-related contracts. So far as the first is concerned, we 
believe that the increased flexibility that will be obtained is worth the 
price of breaching the principle of an all-graduate profession. However, 
in practice this objection will probably not apply in the future, since 
with the expansion of higher education we might expect the majority of 
'para-professional' posts in universities to be filled by graduate staff. 
Similarly, we are not convinced by the arguments of the appropriate 
professional bodies that certification is always necessary in its current 
form. Indeed, in many universities the membership of relevant 
professional bodies is neither recommended nor felt to be relevant. 
Rather, the onus is on the bodies concerned to change their membership 
structures to fit the more flexible needs of the decade. Finally, so far 
as the interests of staff holding current contracts are concerned, their 
positions should be considered in a responsible way, including 
discussions with the appropriate trade unions where relevant.

4.23In practice, achieving such a step will not be easy for 
institutions and a national framework will be needed. Detailed 
discussions will have to take place with the Committee of Vice 
Chancellors and Principals and the Standing Conference of Principals, 
since any changes proposed for the LIS environment must be seen in the 
context of the situation for other university staff. However, we believe 
it important that any national staffing considerations do not prevent 
progress in the LIS area, where there are strong arguments for change. A 
possible approach would be for an LIS study to be a pilot for a later, 
broader review of the topic. We therefore suggest that a job evaluation 
exercise is undertaken to consider the structure of revised staffing 
grades and associated conditions of service in LIS.  We recommend that, 
after consultation with CVCP and PCEF and in conjunction with other 
related studies, the Funding Councils should consider commissioning a 
number of pilot job evaluation studies in LIS in order to explore the 
introduction of an integrated grading system to remove the barriers to 
promotion and flexible movement between the different grades of staff.

4.24Such a review should include staff who work in computer centres 
and other parts of services that may be converged. Although primarily of 
relevance to the 'old' universities, it may be necessary for at least one 
study to be undertaken in the 'new' universities in order for comparisons 
to be made. At least four studies will probably be the minimum necessary 
involving different types of institutions and converged and non-converged 
services. An additional issue for such a review to consider is how high 
level academic advisory and support skills for library/information 
services staff (including those involved in facilitating open learning) 
can be appropriately graded and rewarded. Typically, many job evaluation 
schemes find it difficult to classify such work within conventional job 
evaluation criteria, and if a scheme is to be developed which has the 
confidence of both universities and library/information service staff, it 
is important that the issue should be resolved.

Staff appraisal

4.25From the answers to the LISU questionnaire it would appear that 
approximately 57% of institutions responding had a formal staff appraisal 
scheme in operation for 'professional' staff, approximately 25% had a 
scheme for 'non professionals' and only approximately 9% for staff 
defined in the questionnaire as ancillary. So far as 'professional' staff 
are concerned, this figure is somewhat lower than might have been 
expected, and suggests that some universities have not introduced schemes 
for library staff, even though they have been required to do so for their 
academic colleagues. For 'non professional' and ancillary staff, 
institutional action may have been held up in some cases because of an 
absence of a national agreement with recognised trade unions and the 
differing attitudes of individual union branches. However, it is 
unfortunate that progress with this group of staff has been slow and we 
make recommendations below to remedy the matter.

4.26Many institutions with formal staff appraisal schemes attached the 
relevant documentation in their response to the LISU questionnaire and it 
is evident that the types of appraisal scheme vary considerably, the main 
differences being:

The purposes of schemes vary widely, with many focusing upon staff 
development, whilst others attempt to serve as a vehicle for current 
improvement in job performance through the identification of key 
objectives and associated achievements, failures and constraints. Both of 
these approaches involved an open discussion between the two parties 
concerned, but in a small number of cases a more formal judgement of 
performance is made against predetermined categories, in a few cases 
using a numbered rating scale.

The link between appraisal and promotion varies considerably, with some 
schemes being linked to the promotion process, whilst the outcomes of 
others are strictly confidential to the two parties concerned (and 
usually, but not always, the relevant head of department). In the former 
category there is at least one scheme that requires a positive outcome of 
the appraisal process as a prerequisite of a movement from one staff 
grading to another. 

The identity of the appraiser varies quite widely with three main 
approaches being evident: the head of department concerned; another 
senior member of the library (often to keep the number of interviews 
conducted per appraiser to below ten, although the logic of this depends 
upon the purposes of the particular scheme); or a colleague chosen by the 
person being appraised. 

The information that can be used within the appraisal process also varies 
widely. In almost all cases the appraisee produces a summary of 
activities undertaken in the period being reviewed (usually one year but 
every two years in a number of institutions), but additional information 
may include: CVs; staff development and training records; customer/user 
feedback information data (particularly valuable in the case of subject 
librarians); peers (on team working skills); and so on.

4.27No evidence of the effectiveness of such appraisal schemes was 
sought as part of this study (and indeed very little is apparently 
available within institutions), but it is clear from the use of such 
schemes in higher education generally that their effectiveness is patchy. 
While some institutions report considerable success, typical problems 
that are reported include: institutions not implementing schemes 
appropriately; appraisers being unclear about their roles, perhaps having 
inadequate training, and receiving little institutional or departmental 
support; action agreed during the appraisal process not being 
subsequently undertaken; and so on. The annual appraisal process offers 
managers an opportunity to link the performance of the individual to the 
LIS' overall strategies and performance objectives, as well as providing 
a chance to review or revise job descriptions. We believe that 
universities should review the effectiveness of their appraisal schemes 
at regular intervals and take remedial action accordingly. Nonetheless, 
the experience of a number of institutions has shown that, when carefully 
designed and implemented, staff appraisal schemes can be beneficial to 
both appraiser and appraisee. It is important that all categories of 
staff are covered by an appraisal process, particularly since barriers 
between roles and functions are disappearing. Therefore we recommend that 
staff appraisal schemes be extended to include all staff in 
library/information services, where this is currently not the case.

4.28With the possible introduction of new forms of grading systems 
in some institutions and new competences and skills required by a wide 
range of staff, LIS staff appraisal systems will need to be kept under 
review, and updated in order that they can support, rather than inhibit, 
change processes. With this in mind we recommend that the effectiveness 
of existing staff appraisal schemes should be reviewed at three yearly 
intervals. We appreciate that this recommendation is one for the 
university's personnel function, rather than for the LIS managers.

Training and staff development

4.29In a time of rapid change for library/information services the 
availability of high quality training and staff development for all staff 
becomes increasingly important, and in this section we comment initially 
on existing provision and then make recommendations as to how this might 
be improved and reorganised. The changing roles of staff, the increasing 
use of information systems, and the declining numbers of professional 
staff provide much of the internal imperative for effective training and 
development. However, major external pressures also exist, most notably 
through the introduction of National Vocational Qualifications (which are 
discussed in more detail in the next section), and the Investors in 
People award which several universities are intending to apply for. Much 
has been written in recent years about training and development in 
libraries, and the role of continuing education and continuing 
professional development (CPD) has been discussed particularly within the 
context of COPOL, SCONUL and the Library Association (for an extensive 
account of the topic see Roberts and Konn)21. In the following pages we 
have chosen to use 'continuing education' and CPD synonymously with 
training and staff development, though it is recognised that differences 
of interpretation do exist.

4.30The current situation in university library/information services 
is characterised by considerable diversity in the quality, quantity and 
formality of institutional provision. In some universities and colleges 
training and development initiatives are well advanced, with clearly 
defined policies in existence and a wide variety of programmes including 
well thought out induction strategies for new staff. Indeed, in some 
cases libraries have been in the forefront in their own institutions in 
encouraging and supporting training and development. Such examples of 
good practice should be more widely known within the sector, and less 
effective institutions could borrow much from their example. In many 
other institutions, however, activities appear to be less well developed, 
and are organised on a much more ad hoc basis. In a relatively recent 
survey on attitudes to continuing education (MacDougall et al 1989)22 
library staff identified significant differences in the importance 
attached to the activity by their employing institutions, with only 22% 
being of the opinion that 'old' universities gave it a high priority, 
compared with 43% in the 'old' polytechnics. Such data were frequently 
supported in our conversations with staff development practitioners, who 
in general took the view that the 
ex-polytechnics were much more active.

4.31Data from the LISU questionnaire reveal two aspects of the 
provision of training and staff development within libraries: the extent 
of formal staff development programmes, and the range of time spent on 
activities. So far as the former is concerned, approximately 60% of the 
universities who responded had formal staff development programmes for 
their 'professional' staff, 55% for their 'non professional' staff, and 
only 15% for their so-called ancillary staff. However, when asked about 
the funding of specific staff development activities for both 
'professional' and 'non professional' staff, a much greater level of 
activity was suggested with approximately 90% of institutions saying that 
they funded short course fees, arranged internal courses, organised 
occasional seminars and so on. For ancillary staff approximately 40% of 
institutions made such provision. In this sense the data supports both 
the impression of our visits and our search of the literature in 
suggesting that a key issue is that of the need for clear staff 
development and training policies in many institutions.

4.32So far as the amount of time spent on training and development 
is concerned, the data for 'professional' staff suggest that between 11% 
and 2% of staff time is spent on training with the sector averaging 5%. 
For 'para professional' staff the figure is lower and ranges from 7% to 
1% (the former being the pre-1960 universities and the latter the 
specialist colleges), with an average of 4% of staff time spent on 
training. Clearly such data need to be treated with caution, both because 
of their preliminary nature, and also because of possible definitional 
problems concerning the classification of staff. However, it does 
demonstrate both a high level of provision in some institutions and 
considerable variation across the sector as a whole. LISU-derived data 
concerning spending on staff training and development shows a similar 
spread with estimated averages of 2.0% recorded for 40 old universities 
and 3.8% for 29 new universities: (this may not be reliable because of 
apparent misunderstanding about the information that was sought).

4.33Much training activity does not, of course, involve significant 
costs other than staff time, and it has been reported that more than half 
of continuing education in academic libraries involves no direct 
financial cost (MacDougall et al, 1989). In this context, methods of 
training and development such as exchanges, work shadowing, projects, 
action learning and so on have a valuable role to play. The trend towards 
organisational convergence of libraries and information services brings 
with it opportunities for greater effectiveness in the organisation of 
training, as does the trend towards greater regional cooperation. A 
number of regional networks or groupings of libraries have run low cost 
cooperative activities for some years, an initiative that needs to be 
further extended throughout the UK. Such collaborative training 
activities would not only be valuable in themselves, but also provide a 
focus for the continuing development of such regional co-operation.

4.34Just as the money and time spent on training and development 
vary considerably by institution, so does the way it is structured. A 
small number of institutions have moved to a formalised style of 
planning, whereby training needs are both collectively and individually 
assessed, activities identified, and records of completion maintained and 
regularly updated. Usually - and desirably - this is organised by a 
senior member of staff with specific responsibility for training and 
staff development, usually on a part-time basis because of the small 
staff numbers in most libraries. As convergence with other services 
becomes more common, this role may need a full-time person. In this 
context a number of libraries are starting to use the new Library 
Association CDP documentation (or similar approaches) to ensure 
consistency in the planning of training and development. In most 
institutions activities are less well organised, with individual members 
of staff expected to initiate proposals, and training undertaken on a 
voluntary basis except for a small amount of mandatory participation in 
key topics, for example, induction, and training associated with legal 
requirements, eg health and safety. In some cases, no senior member of 
staff has a formal responsibility for training and development, but even 
where a person is identified, the task may be undertaken in a reactive 
and passive manner. In a small number of cases responsibility for 
training and development rests with a library working party.

4.35Experience in both private and public sectors shows clearly that 
effective training and development requires coherent organisation and 
senior management commitment, and libraries/information services should 
aim to implement the following activities as a part of that process:
Devising a comprehensive staff development and training policy and 
plan for all staff, which should be based upon a regular identification 
of training needs, set within the context of resource availability and 
requirements. As a minimum, such a policy should set out: the aims and 
objectives of training within a particular library/information service; 
existing priorities; the methods by which they will be achieved 
(induction, short courses, visits, placements, open learning, CAL, etc); 
the responsibilities of all those involved in the process; the 
possibilities for undertaking further qualifications (either academic or 
professional), including policies on supporting NVQs, and the extent to 
which membership of professional associations is encouraged; forms of 
senior staff support and mentoring; forms of record keeping and 
monitoring individual achievement; policy on whether training is 
compulsory or voluntary; the ways that both the policy and activities 
will be evaluated; and the link to the staff appraisal and review 
process. Such a policy should be updated annually, and both the policy 
and its implementation might be formally reviewed every three to five 
years. The existing institutional staff development policies received by 
the library review varied considerably, from those that met most or all 
of these criteria to those that were inadequate in many ways.

Nominating a senior member of the library/information service to have 
formal responsibility for training and staff development.

Identifying and publishing the budgetary and financial framework for 
training and development, with an indication of the amount of time staff 
are expected to devote to these activities (see below).

Ensuring that wherever possible the results of training and development 
are put into practice as quickly as possible on-the-job. Not only does 
this require careful coordination with supervisors and managers, but it 
may suggest forms of learning that are competence-based.

4.36There was a general view among most of the senior staff we 
interviewed that management training in library/information services was, 
in general, underdeveloped, and we agree. A small number of short courses 
on management is run by a variety of organisations, and in some 
universities senior staff participate in specific institutional 
activities on topics such as team building, leadership, and so on. In 
general provision across the sector is poor and needs to be improved, not 
just at the most senior levels but for all staff who exercise significant 
managerial or organisational responsibilities; discussions are currently 
taking place on this issue between COPOL, SCONUL and the Universities 
Staff Development Unit (USDU) in Sheffield.

Recommendations on training and staff development

4.37Two main steps need to be taken concerning the organisation of 
training and staff development within the sector: first, those 
institutions whose provision is unsatisfactory need to improve so as to 
match those institutions who currently represent 'good practice'. In 
order to do this guides to such good practice on staff development need 
to be more widely available and we recommend that SCONUL, COPOL and other 
relevant bodies consider how these could be produced. Once this 
information is available, LIS managers will need to consider the 
effectiveness of their own practices in the light of established best 
practice. In some cases they may have to argue for changes and 
improvements in central university processes and systems. In particular, 
LIS managers should identify one person to be responsible for all staff 
development matters and should ask this person to develop formal policies 
in this area. We recommend that Library/Information Services should 
nominate a senior member of staff to have formal responsibility for staff 
training and development and, where there is currently no formal 
statement of staff development and training policy, one should be 
introduced as soon as is practicable. Second, and without in any way 
infringing institutional autonomy, much more 
co-ordination of training across the sector could bring useful results. 
Although a number of special interest groups currently exist (for 
example, the Universities, Colleges and Research Group of the Library 
Association), no real co-ordination exists on the provision of training 
and staff development, and initiatives are undertaken in a relatively 
unplanned and ad-hoc way. Such co-operation could take a number of forms, 
and those involved should learn from the experience of other parts of the 
higher education sector in their attempts to achieve such co-ordination 
both through the USDU and in other ways. Therefore, we recommend that 
COPOL, SCONUL, HCLRG and other relevant bodies consider how to achieve 
greater co-ordination in the provision of training and staff development 
for all library/information services staff.

4.38Considerable discussion has taken place within some 
libraries/information services about the types of training and staff 
development that will be required in the near future, and, as noted 
above, some institutions have undertaken a comprehensive training needs 
analysis. From such reviews and the interviews we undertook, it is 
possible to determine a number of major themes in future provision in 
addition to regular technical skills training:

The need for the development and updating of IT skills and competences 
(which is dealt with fully in the Report of the IT Sub Group).

Training in customer service skills and associated questions of 
interpersonal behaviour.

Training to support the management of change. 

The need to develop approaches to, and skills in, team working within 
both libraries and converged library/information services.

Training and associated activities to support quality improvement 
programmes such as TQM.

4.39To this list should be added one major future training and 
development need, relating to the discussion in Paragraph 4.13 above. As 
the availability and use of open learning materials increases within 
higher education, so the roles of library/information staff will be 
extended in some institutions to include providing initial student 
support. Coupled with this will be an increasing tendency for subject 
librarians (or staff holding similar positions) to become involved in 
assisting academic departments with both course design and the 
development of teaching materials. Hence, a major training and 
development need will emerge in enhancing the skills of staff to perform 
this role. It is too early yet to recommend how this need should be met 
in organisational terms, and much depends on the national initiatives 
that emerge as regards the training of academic staff. However, a few 
universities already provide internal courses on teaching and learning 
which library staff may attend (in at least one case leading to a 
qualification), and others are likely to use the ADDFOL qualification for 
trainers involved in open learning developed under the auspices of the 
Training and Development Lead Body for NVQs. 

4.40The desirability of an overall training needs analysis of the 
academic library/information services sector was suggested to us, but we 
do not think such a step is necessary as it would duplicate some of the 
work that is being done as part of the introduction of NVQs.

4.41We have already observed that current management training is 
inadequate and we recommend that it be enhanced in a number of ways. 
First, programmes on basic managerial skills are required for a range of 
staff who have never formally received such training (including in some 
cases the heads of services), on topics as diverse as recruitment and 
selection of staff through to financial management. Second, programmes on 
leadership and associated issues are required for those middle or senior 
managers in LIS who have major staff management responsibilities, and 
aspire to head of service positions. This kind of programme is currently 
being considered by COPOL/SCONUL and USDU, but a case may exist for a 
small amount of initial funding to pump prime its design and 
implementation. There is some evidence to suggest that, if such a course 
were to be run, the full economic costs which would have to be charged 
might deter widespread applications. Third, for established chief 
librarians and heads of services we believe that a high quality programme 
looking at both strategic, policy and operational issues would be highly 
desirable, run perhaps every second year. Such a programme would be more 
satisfactory if participants included representatives from outside the UK 
library/information services world, to allow new ideas and perspectives 
to be considered. There are two possibilities: that chief librarians 
participate in a programme designed for managers from both public and 
private sectors (along the lines of the Civil Service Top Management 
Programme); or that an international programme is run focusing on 'state 
of the art' library/information service management in advanced countries 
- both should be considered. It is very likely that pump priming would 
also be necessary for the design and implementation of a course of this 
kind. We therefore recommend that the Funding Councils should consider 
funding pilot management training programmes from the LIS Innovation Fund 
in two areas: for chief librarians and heads of service, and for those at 
deputy or equivalent level with large staff management responsibilities.

4.42However, management training should not be based solely on 
formal approaches of this kind, and much could be done by borrowing the 
best private sector practices of mentoring, action learning, exchange 
schemes and so on. The consideration of best practice in these areas 
should be part of the discussions, recommended in paragraph 4.37, on 
achieving greater co-ordination in training and staff development. 

4.43If the extensive training and development required is to be run 
effectively and efficiently, it will be necessary for most activities to 
take place in-house using suitable training and open learning materials. 
Although some such materials currently exist (for example, Open 
University management programmes, University of Brighton 'trigger' videos 
on interpersonal skills, and so on) many others will be required. Such 
materials might be produced in a number of forms, including the use of 
computer assisted learning (CAL) run on existing hardware. Some work is 
already in progress in this area (for example, that undertaken by the CTI 
Centre for Library and Information Studies at Loughborough University) 
but the production of such materials is a complex and time consuming 
task. Since it is important to avoid duplication of activity by different 
institutions a first step should be a survey/inventory of existing 
materials. This should be followed by a programme of modification and 
dissemination of those materials which meet the more common needs. Only 
after this stage will it be necessary to begin to develop further new 
materials. Therefore we recommend that Funding Councils should consider 
funding, out of its LIS Innovation Fund, the development and production 
of open learning training materials for use in-house by 
library/information services staff. COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG should consider in 
more detail the exact requirements for such materials and work with the 
Councils in deciding what new materials need to be produced.  

4.44Finally, we turn to a recommendation on the proportion of staff 
time and budget that training and staff development might reasonably 
require. As noted above, current institutional practice varies very 
significantly, and staff time is rarely costed and included in the total 
costs of training. It is clear that some LIS managers have difficulty 
with such costing. If the training agenda described above is to be 
implemented, then we have no hesitation in suggesting that all higher 
education institutions will need to increase their training investment 
and match the best practice in the sector. We recommend that institutions 
should aim to allocate a minimum of 5% of LIS staff time to training and 
development. This is a minimum recommendation and many institutions will 
wish to exceed it, and the LISU survey suggests that some already do. For 
those universities who currently fall well short of this figure, it is 
recognised that achieving this level of commitment may not be easy, but 
it is essential if staff are to be effective in their new roles. We do 
not suggest that all members of staff would have to devote 5% of their 
workload each year to training and development activities, as this would 
be unnecessarily restrictive. 

LIS Innovation Fund

4.45In paragraph 4.19 we proposed that the Funding Councils should 
establish an LIS Innovation Fund which would pump prime new human 
resource developments in libraries and information services. We recommend 
that the sum of  1 million should be set aside for this purpose in each 
of three years.

4.46The Fund would be used only for those purposes set out in 
paragraph 4.19: thus, the projects proposed in paragraph 4.23 and in a 
later section on NVQs would be financed separately. A possible allocation 
of the Fund would be: 

Employment of additional library staff in innovative roles:10 funded 
projects ona competitive basis at up to 45,000 each450,000

Support for internal training in libraries relating to restructuring, 
upskilling 'nonprofessional' staff and developing teaching/open learning 
skills in subject librarians 10 funded projects on a competitive basis 
at up to 25,000 each 250,000

Support for management training in libraries by pump priming the 
development of two regular courses40,000

Support for open learning initiatives in libraries:10 funded projects 
available on a competitive basis at up to 25,000 each250,000

Total annual expenditure 990,000

4.47The Funding Councils would need to establish a mechanism for 
reviewing and allocating the funds if they accepted this recommendation. 
One obvious possibility would be to re-convene the Review Group's sub-
group on management as the focus for this new role.

National Vocational Qualifications

4.48Much of the discussion on staff development and the changing 
roles of library/information services personnel is closely related to the 
developments in the introduction of National Vocational Qualifications 
(NVQs). In our meetings with senior managers we found widely differing 
states of awareness about the implications of NVQs. Amongst those 
managers who were aware of the implications there was a broad spread of 
views on the desirability of the NVQ approach. In order to try and 
encourage an increased awareness of the current situation we therefore 
set out below the background to NVQs before turning to the implications 
for LIS. It should be noted that other approaches to defining competences 
exist, and an extensive international literature has emerged on the 
subject. However, as the main focus in the UK is likely to be associated 
with NVQs, we deal solely with this approach below. 

4.49The National Council for Vocational Qualifications (NCVQ) was 
set up by the government in 1986 to provide a quality assurance system 
for qualifications which are designed to meet the needs of employment as 
defined by employers. It is responsible for National Vocational 
Qualifications (NVQs) which are awarded on the basis of competence in the 
workplace rather than on traditional academic study. In Scotland the 
Scottish Vocational Educational Council (SCOTVEC) carries out a similar 
role. The development of NVQs takes place within a particular industry, 
through the establishment of a 'lead body' established by employers with 
representation from trades unions and other appropriate organisations. 
Approximately 170 lead bodies currently exist, and each one is 
responsible for determining what it will require of an awarding body for 
its sector. NCVQ is not itself an awarding body; rather, it accredits 
bodies which meet its criteria, and the awarding bodies offer 
qualifications based on competence-related standards, which can be 
awarded at five progressive levels. In order to ensure comparability 
between lead bodies and different industries, NCVQ have developed a 
methodology for determining competences based upon functional analysis in 
which key occupational functions are defined as the basis for the 
subsequent development of standards of competence.

4.50Those who are involved in the implementation of NVQs identify a 
number of potential benefits for both employers and employees. For 
employers it is argued that nationally recognised standards of 
occupational competence are an essential basis for the development of a 
trained workforce, and also that they enable much current training to be 
adapted so as to be formally recognised through a qualification. For 
employees, evidence of NVQs may become a form of national currency in the 
employment market, with documented NVQ assessment providing a basis for 
internal promotion as well as showing potential employers exactly what 
competences an individual possesses. 

NVQs and library and information services

4.51The Information and Library Services (ILS) Lead Body has been 
established to oversee the development of NVQs in the library industry, 
and the Library Association has been contracted by the Employment 
Department to provide secretariat and project management services for it. 
However, it is important to note that other lead bodies accredit NVQs 
that will also be appropriate for library/information service staff, 
including: the Management Charter Initiative (MCI) which has produced 
management standards; Training and Development, whose work may be 
particularly relevant in the development of open learning; Business 
Administration, whose qualifications are already being sought by small 
numbers of library/information staff in a few universities; Customer 
Service; and various Information Systems qualifications. No awarding body 
has yet been chosen or accredited by the ILS Lead Body. No lead body has 
yet been appointed for academic staff in higher education.

4.52Representatives of both COPOL and SCONUL are members of the ILS 
Lead Body, and detailed work on standards based on the concept of 
functional maps is currently being undertaken by consultants for the 
sector as a whole. The Department of Employment is currently not funding 
work for the development of level 5 NVQs in this sector, and existing 
work is therefore based on levels up to 4. Draft standards were published 
in June 1993 and an 'extensive consultation stage' followed in the period 
to September 1993 with 2000 members of the sector invited to complete a 
questionnaire.  Appendix III reproduces a broad functional map of the 
units of competence and a sample element, showing the performance 
criteria for conducting a search for information. This work has been 
based upon the requirements of the sector as a whole, and no significant 
account has yet been taken of any specific competences that may be 
required in the academic library/information services context. Thus, 
until the testing phase has occurred, it is difficult to offer any firm 
recommendation of the appropriateness to academic libraries of the 
current work of the Lead Body. It is, therefore, very important that such 
testing should include a range of different types of academic 
library/information services, and we make recommendations to this effect 
below. 

4.53In addition to the implications for individual universities and 
colleges, there are major consequences for library schools in the 
development of NVQs. The development of level 4 qualifications is likely 
to have an impact on undergraduate programmes, and if level 5 were to be 
introduced subsequently then the nature and form of postgraduate 
programmes might need to be reviewed. The implications for library 
schools of NVQs fall outside the terms of reference of this study, but 
individual schools and other interested organisations such as BAILER will 
need to keep this matter under regular review.

4.54There is one further issue which deserves attention both within 
academic libraries/information services and universities. The ILS Lead 
Body has chosen to identify its key purpose as "to anticipate, determine, 
stimulate and satisfy the needs of existing and potential users for 
access to information in an ethical manner". However, it is not clear 
that this definition automatically encompasses some of the new and 
developing roles of library/information services staff in supporting 
student learning, still less those in direct teaching. There are two 
possible consequences: first, that the work of one of the other lead 
bodies (probably Training and Development) might be more appropriate in 
helping LIS managers define these competences particularly in the context 
of the enhancement of open and resource-based learning; and second, that 
the issue might be best dealt with in relation to discussions about 
teaching and learning competences for academic staff. In this context, a 
number of proposals - controversial in the higher education community - 
have been made for the establishment of a lead body for academic staff in 
higher education, but no steps have yet been initiated by the Departments 
of Employment and Education. However this issue is dealt with, there 
appears to be a possible problem concerning the credibility of ILS Lead 
Body competences within higher education, if some of the key future roles 
of library/information services staff cannot be defined within them.

4.55From all this it is clear that the work of the ILS Lead Body may 
have major implications for academic library/information services 
management during the next five years, but, following the interviews we 
have conducted, we have become increasingly concerned about the relative 
lack of knowledge of, and apparent interest in, the topic within the 
sector. Whilst there are, of course, a number of senior staff aware of 
developments, the general impression is of an overly passive and reactive 
attitude to the whole question being adopted within academic libraries. 
This attitude is partly explained by the wait for the draft standards, 
which have now been published, and partly by the complex nature of the 
methodology and technical language used (see below). However, we believe 
that there has, in addition, been both a relative ignorance within 
universities (particularly traditional ones) about the importance of NVQs 
in the years ahead, and also a hope that lack of action will cause the 
issue to 'go away'. Therefore we recommend that at the earliest 
opportunity CVCP should take the initiative with COPOL, SCONUL, HCLRG and 
other interested parties and meet to decide how to play a more proactive 
role, within the Library Association framework, in the development and 
application of NVQs for academic libraries/information services.

Existing views on NVQs in universities and colleges

4.56We have already observed that there is widespread ignorance 
about NVQ developments within the sector. However, in our interviews, 
those members of staff who were aware of the NVQ methodology and issues 
concerning its implementation voiced a number of conflicting opinions 
which we summarise below.

4.57Amongst some senior managers there was enthusiasm about the 
potential of NVQs to enhance training and development, particularly for 
staff at the clerical or library assistant level. As noted above, the 
training and development needs of such staff have frequently been 
overlooked, and NVQs were felt to be capable of making a significant 
contribution both to improving performance and also to improving 
motivation through providing greater recognition for the application of 
current skills and competences. In this context, the clear link between 
training and the on-the-job demonstration of competence was felt to have 
obvious advantages. In a small number of cases, academic 
library/information services are already exploring NVQs offered by lead 
bodies other than ILS and small numbers of staff may be undertaking 
qualifications. Indeed, in a few universities the staff development 
policy documents clearly specify that staff will be supported if they 
undertake NVQs.

4.58Amongst other managers greater reservations about NVQs were 
expressed, and we list these below in order to ensure that they can be 
considered appropriately in the consultation and field testing stages of 
the ILS Lead Body proposals. The concerns we most often heard were as 
follows.

The language of NVQs and the bureaucracy associated with them was 
frequently raised as a problem. Such concerns are, however, not limited 
to the higher education community, and the former Secretary of State for 
Employment herself recently commented in a critical way on this.

There are widespread concerns that the NCVQ methodology is over-
prescriptive, and its approach to measuring competences was frequently 
seen as being more appropriate for basic routine skills than for complex 
high order tasks. It is particularly significant that the majority of 
those who advocated the benefits of NVQs saw them as being most 
appropriate at levels 2 and 3, and most problematic at levels 4 and 5 
(should the latter eventually come about). Some respondents went further 
and said that if the methodology could not prove itself during testing at 
the highest levels, it followed that it was conceptually flawed and thus 
should not be introduced at all.

A particular aspect of the concern over methodology at levels 4 and 
perhaps 5 was voiced in relation to library schools, although here there 
is likely to be a rigorous debate between those who would be happy to 
adopt an NVQ approach as they regard their current curriculum as being 
competence-based, and those who would resist strongly. In practice it is 
likely that most schools will wait to see if demand from employers 
materialises before considering major curriculum changes. In this context 
library schools may wish to learn from the experience of university 
business schools which are currently debating similar issues in relation 
to the possible adoption of MCI levels 4 and 5

The potential cost of NVQs was also raised by a number of senior 
managers, particularly in the context of the numerous other current 
demands on library resources. At the moment no reliable data exist on the 
likely costs to institutions, and although the Department of Employment 
has funded the design of the NVQ system, it regards its operation as the 
clear responsibility of the industry concerned. Costs are likely to be of 
two kinds: direct training costs (of both candidates and in-house 
assessors); and also awarding costs, probably through an amount charged 
for each candidate to cover registration, assessment, and all the 
associated costs of the awarding body. The level of costs is a reason why 
some employers in other industries have been slow to respond to the NVQ 
approach. In any case, costs will be a new, identifiable, direct cost 
element in LIS training and staff development budgets, although what they 
are buying will to some extent be replacing existing training activity.

Finally, a number of managers, whilst seeing the potential benefits to 
staff of NVQs, did not see similar benefits to universities and colleges 
as employers, although there was no unanimity on this point. Those who 
took this view felt that the accumulation of NVQs would lead to over-
expectation of promotion and reward on the part of staff, and might lead 
to salaries drifting out of line with market levels. Clearly, as with 
much of the discussion about staff development, the context of individual 
institutions may determine the importance of these factors. It is likely 
that those institutions with low staff turnover and a high demand for 
library assistant jobs, when advertised, may take a rather less generous 
view than those institutions with a high staff turnover for whom high 
quality training is a major way of retaining valued staff.

Conclusions and action on NVQs

4.59Until there is further clarification of the issues referred to 
above, it is difficult to draw precise conclusions or make 
recommendations for action. However, three things should be done. First, 
we have already recommended in paragraph 4.55 that an early meeting of 
interested parties be convened to consider developments in the NVQ 
process. Second, and more significantly, in the context of the potential 
problems described above, we believe that the introduction of NVQs into 
library/information services would be made significantly easier if a 
small number of demonstration projects could be run, resourced by the 
Funding Councils. Projects should take place in different settings, most 
probably a small college, a large teaching oriented institution, a large 
research oriented one, and an institution developing a major open 
learning facility. Each project should involve initial participation with 
the ILS Lead Body testing (the arrangements to be discussed with them), 
followed as soon as possible by a full trial implementation of both the 
ILS and other Lead Body frameworks (including the possible application of 
ADDFOL certification). The results should be rigorously evaluated by 
external assessors and the results disseminated widely (see below). The 
costs of such demonstration projects are difficult to formulate exactly, 
but might be in the order of  50,000 for each project. Therefore, we 
recommend that, once ILS Lead Body standards are available, the Funding 
Council might, if appropriate, fund four demonstration projects to ensure 
that the quality of LIS services is strengthened by the use of NVQs in 
staff development.

4.60Third, for all the reasons listed above, it is clear that the 
enthusiasm for NVQs varies significantly in the higher education system, 
and for this reason the adoption of NVQs will be patchy. It is likely 
that a small number of institutions will move quickly to take advantage 
of the opportunity of NVQs from various lead bodies and the ILS when 
agreed and implemented - assisted no doubt by the demonstration projects 
recommended above. However, others will be more cautious and wish to 
assess the experience of other institutions before acting. In this 
context we recommend that, in due course, COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG should 
develop mechanisms to review institutional experiences in implementing 
NVQs and to disseminate information from these reviews.

5Conclusions, Dissemination Strategy and Recommendations

Conclusions

5.1This study is being undertaken at a time when external factors are 
making an already complex picture even more difficult to describe. It is 
clear that university libraries cannot now be neatly categorised into one 
or two organisational models, although by the year 2000 some form of 
ranking or hierarchy may be acknowledged in terms of research or 
'holdings' libraries, as compared with 'access' libraries. The purpose of 
this study is not to make these distinctions but to review the staffing 
implications of whatever pattern emerges.

5.2Most of our predictions for the future assume a continuation of 
current trends and a greater adoption by all of the best practice now 
being followed by the few. In some cases it may even be that our 
recommendations have little to offer an institution, which is now 
undertaking them all; in other cases we may be calling for radical 
change.

5.3The principal area where we expect major new change relates to 
learner support, which we have defined in paragraph 3.22.  LIS staff have 
managed to handle the acquisition of many new skills in recent years; 
those required by the learner support tasks could be of a new order, even 
though it has to be admitted that every new member of academic staff 
faces exactly the same challenge. The LIS person does have the additional 
problems of an uncertain legitimacy in the role and an environment where 
teaching skills are not common to all colleagues. In other words, he or 
she lacks the comfort that a group of peers can offer a new entrant to 
the profession. 

5.4Improved organisation and provision of training and staff 
development is, as one might expect, central to our recommendations. In 
this we echo one of the views of the IT Sub-Group and parallel the 1990 
Ross Report in Australia. It is, however, clear that, while many 
institutions have admirable staff development programmes, a very large 
number do not. Some areas of training have also been much under-stressed; 
training for managers at all levels falls into this category. We suggest 
that the Funding Councils could help to get some collaborative 
initiatives off the ground in this area.

5.5We had hoped that we could have built on the work of the ILS Lead 
Body for NVQs and presented the sector with a set of competences as a 
basis for all future staff development. The timing has been against us, 
as it was not until this autumn that the first pilot studies of standards 
began in a selection of libraries. Our main achievement has been to alert 
representatives of the sector to the very real risk that the standards 
may be of no use to them unless they get more deeply involved. The 
particular concern will be the rapidly changing role of the 'library 
assistant' or equivalent, as this grade takes on more functions formerly 
associated with the 'professional' staff grades, which are not well 
covered within the skills sets of public librarians.

Dissemination Strategy

5.6Despite the very wide range of practice in institutions, we believe 
that it will be important for the Funding Councils to give attention to a 
programme for discussing and disseminating the ideas in this report. 
There are two possible audiences:

University personnel officers who should be brought into discussions 
about the proposals for integrated grading systems and the application of 
NVQs.

Managers of LIS who will need to be involved in full discussions about 
the relevance of our recommendations to them and their institutions.                                               

5.7The CVCP's planned programme of regional workshops would offer a 
suitable framework for involving these two sets of audiences and we 
recommend that the Funding Councils work closely with the CVCP on a 
programme for disseminating the recommendations of this report with 
particular reference to the quality of institutional management of LIS.                       

Recommendations

5.8Our recommendations are presented in sets for their particular 
audiences, commencing with institutions:
For institutions:

(a)All heads of LIS should work closely within the senior management of 
their institution to prepare strategic plans which define clearly the 
role of the service and its interaction with the institution's IS 
strategies. (Paragraph 3.32)

(b)When universities prepare strategic plans for their LIS, they should 
also consciously plan for the people who will put the plans into effect. 
(Paragraph 3.33)

(c)Such plans should review the changing roles of LIS staff and, where 
there is an extension of the learner support role, the boundaries of LIS 
responsibility should be agreed with the relevant academic person 
responsible. (Paragraph 3.33)

(d)Staff appraisal schemes should be extended to cover all staff in 
library/information services, where this is currently not the case. 
(Paragraph 4.27)

(e)The effectiveness of existing staff appraisal schemes should be 
reviewed at three yearly intervals. (Paragraph 4.28)

(f)Library/Information services should nominate a senior member of 
staff to have formal responsibility for staff training and development 
and, where there is currently no formal statement of staff development 
and training policy, one should be introduced as soon as is practicable. 
(Paragraph 4.37)

(g)Institutions should aim to allocate a minimum of 5% of LIS staff 
time to training and development. (Paragraph 4.44)
For CVCP and SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG:

(h)COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG should review the initial training needs of LIS 
staff and hold formal discussions with BAILER, building on the detailed 
operational links that exist. (Paragraph 4.14)

(i)SCONUL/COPOL/HCLRG and other relevant bodies should consider how to 
produce guides to good practice in staff development and also how to 
achieve greater co-ordination in the provision of training and 
development for all LIS staff. (Paragraph 4.37) 

(j)At the earliest opportunity CVCP should take the initiative with 
COPOL, SCONUL, HCLRG etc and meet to decide how to play a more proactive 
role, within the Library Association framework, in the development and 
application of NVQs for academic libraries/information services. 
(Paragraph 4.55)

(k)In due course COPOL/SCONUL/HCLRG should develop mechanisms to review 
institutional experiences in implementing NVQs and to disseminate 
information from these reviews. (Paragraph 4.60) 
For the Funding Councils:

(l)After consultation with CVCP and PCEF, and in conjunction with other 
related studies, the Funding Councils should consider commissioning a 
number of pilot job evaluation studies in LIS in order to explore the 
introduction of an integrated grading system to remove the barriers to 
promotion and flexible movement between the different grades of staff. 
(Paragraph 4.23)

(m)The Councils should consider establishing an LIS Innovation Fund 
which would for three years pump prime projects in three categories:

pilot management training programmes for the chief librarians and heads 
of service, and for those at deputy or equivalent level with large staff 
management responsibilities

the development and production of open learning training materials for 
use in-house by LIS staff

short term support for innovative staff posts created to serve either one 
or a group of institutions 

For all three purposes a sum of  1 million per annum is suggested. 
(Paragraphs 4.19. 4.41, 4.43 and 4.46)

(n)Once Lead Body standards are available, the Funding Councils might, 
if appropriate, fund four demonstration projects to ensure that the 
quality of LIS services is strengthened by the use of NVQs in staff 
development. (Paragraph 4.59)

(o)The Funding Councils should work closely with the CVCP on a 
programme for disseminating the recommendations of this report with 
particular reference to the quality of institutional management of LIS. 
(Paragraph 5.7)

Appendix 1

Interviews and Discussions

Meetings, interviews or telephone discussions took place with the 
following:
NameInstitution

Marie AdamsLibrarian, Barnet College
Roy AdamsDeputy Librarian, De Montfort University
Penny AitkenLibrarian, Queen Margaret College, Edinburgh
John AkkerDeputy General Secretary, AUT
John ArfieldLibrarian, Loughborough University
David BakerLibrarian, UEA 
Jean BeckDirector of Information, NCET
Diana SaulsburySite Librarian, Bedford College of Higher Education
Geoffrey BrownEuclid. ILS Lead Body NVQ Consultants
Brian BurchLibrarian,Leicester University
Ian BurchartTeesside University
Susan CleggPersonnel & Training Group, Library Association
Mel CollierChief Librarian, De Montfort University
Sheila CorrallDirector of Libraries and Information Services, Aston 
University
Patsy CullenDirector of Library & Learning Resources, Bretton Hall 
College
J Eric DavisLoughborough University of Technology
Joan DayDepartment of Information & Library 
Management,University of Northumbria at Newcastle
Tim DreyVice-Principal, King Alfred's College, Winchester
Kevin EllardUniversity Librarian, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-
Trent
Biddy FisherEmployment & Resources Dept., Library Association
Nigel GardnerDirector of Educational Services, Ulster University
Dr Tom GrahamLibrarian, York University
Peter GuilfordUniversities Staff Development Unit, 
Sheffield University
Tony HallBLCMP
Dr Colin Harris Librarian, Salford University
Albert Harrison Librarian, Strathclyde University
Colin Harrison Dean of Open Learning, Anglia Polytechnic University
Henry HeaneyLibrarian, Glasgow University
Prof Roger KingVice Chancellor, University of Humberside
Dr Paul LavigueurHead of Library & Learning Resources, 
Leeds Metropolitan University
Prof Roger Lewis Chair of Learning Development, University of Humberside
Maurice LineInformation and Library Consultant
Ian LovecyLibrarian, University College of Bangor
Lynne SalterLucas Industries Open Learning, Solihull
William MarstersonHead of ILRS and University Librarian, Middlesex 
University 
Christine MoonHead of Learning Resources, Brighton University
Patrick NoonPersonnel & Training Group, Library Association
Bob OldroydDeputy Librarian, Nottingham University
Peter PackExecutive Officer, Learning Resources Development Group
Prof Alan PhillipsDean of Information Services, 
University of Central England, Birmingham
John PriestleyLibrarian, Plymouth University
Margaret RedfernAssistant Director, Professional Development, Library 
Association
Don RevellDirector of Learning Services, Liverpool 
John Moores University
Bruce RoyanDirector of Information Services, Stirling University
Tony SbathSight & Sound Limited
Dr Malcolm StevensonLibrarian, Bradford University
John SumsionDirector, LISU, Loughborough University of Technology
Jean SykesDeputy Director of IRS, Westminster University
Marie WarrenderStaff College, Coombe Lodge
David WhitakerChairman, Information and Library Services NVQ Lead Body
Marion WilksDirector of Academic Services, West Surrey College of Art & 
Design
Jan WilkinsonDeputy Librarian, British Library of Political and Economic 
Science
Prof Tom WilsonDepartment of Information Studies, Sheffield 
University
Diana Wingate- MartinDeputy Librarian, Hertfordshire University
Kate WoodAssistant Director Education, Library Association



Appendix 2 

References

Armstrong. M. A Handbook of Human Resource Appendix 2
Management. Kogan Page. 1988

Baker. D. What About The Workers? A Study of Non-Professional Staff in 
Library Work. The Library Association. 1986.

Detlefsen. E.G. Specialists as Professionals in Research Libraries. 
Library Trends. Vol. 41. No 2. Fall 1992. 

Dougherty, R.M. and Hughes, C. Preferred Library Futures II: Charting the 
Paths. The Research Libraries Group Inc. Mountain View. California. 
February 1993.

Harris, C. Academic Information Services at the University of Salford. 
British Journal of Academic Librarianship. Vol 3. Number 3. 1988.

Higher Education Council. Library Provision in Higher Education 
Institutions. Commissioned Report No 7. National Board of Employment, 
Education and Training. Australian Government Publishing Service. 
December 1990.

MacDougall, J. Lewins, H. and Tseng, G. Continuing Education and Training 
Opportunities in Librarianship, British Library Research Paper 74, 
British Library Board. 1989.

National Economic Development Office and Manpower Services Commission. 
People -the Key to Success. An action pack, including booklets, video, 
training materials. 1987.

Pitkin, G.M. Ed. Information Management and Organisational Change in 
Higher Education. The impact on academic libraries. Meckler. Westport. 
1992.

Roberts, N. and Konn, T. Librarians and Professional Status: Continuing 
Professional Development and Academic Libraries, The Library Association. 
1991.

Sumsion, J. Academic Library Statistics. Article in The Bookseller. 
January 1993.

Sumsion, J and Fossey, D.R. LISU Annual Library Statistics: Trend 
Analysis of UK Public and Academic Libraries, 1981-91. 1992.

Wollongong, University of. Prospect 2001. Strategic considerations 
affecting the development of Library and Information Services for the 
University of Wollongong 1991 to 2001. University of Wollongong Library. 
1991.

Appendix 3

Information and Library Services Lead Body _ Broad Functional Map 
Key Purpose: To anticipate, determine, stimulate and satisfy the needs of 
existing and potential users for access 
to information in an ethical manner.Key Function 


A Identify and Determine Framework and 
Strategy for Services


BProvide Services to Meet and Stimulate Needs

C Manage and Develop the Organisation
Key Role 

A1Identify Users and Potential Users

A2Forecast and Research User Needs

A3 Establish/Review Service to Meet User 
Needs Within Organisational Parameters

A4Determine and Establish Value and Evaluation
 of Services



A5Contribute to Value of ILS

B1Develop and Improve Available Range of 
Information/Material

B2Organise Information/Material

B3Preserve Physical Integrity and Security of Material

B4Supply Information/Material

B5Promote and Monitor Services Through 
Assistance to Users

C1Procure, Maintain and Develop Human Resources
C2Procure, Maintain and Develop Physical Resources
C3Procure, Maintain and Develop Financial Resources
Unit of Competence
A11Establish Framework
A12Establish User Characteristics
A21Identify User Objectives and Goals
A22 Interpret Information Needs
A23Verify Findings
A31Identify Options for Service Range and 
Delivery
A32Prioritise Options
A33Implement Proposals
A41Identify Success Criteria
A42Identify Valuation Criteria
A43Establish and Implement Evaluation and 
Valuation Process
A51Contribute to the Improvement and 
Development of Standards and Techniques
A52Contribute to the Development of Ethics 
and Practices
A53Contribute to the Flow of Information
A54Design, Implement and Evaluate ILS Research
B11Determine Information/Material Requirements
B12Select Information/Material
B13Acquire Information/Material
B14Create Records of Information
B15Prepare Information/Material
B16Withdraw Unwanted Information Material
B21Record Information/Material
B22Devise Archival Finding Aid
B23Index Information
B24Abstract Information
B25Process Items for Use
B31Establish Facilities for Storage and Display
B32Maintain Storage and Display
B33Secure Material
B34Conserve Material
B41Identify User's Needs
B42Identify Information/Material Required 
by User
B43Implement Strategy to Meet User's Needs
B44Provide Information/Material
B45Recall Item
B46Discharge Item
B51Provide User Education
B52Provide Displays
B53Mount Promotional Event
B54Direct Users
B55Maintain an Environment Supportive 
to Users

MCI
Accountancy
Estate Management
Personnel
Training and Development

Appendix 4

Abbreviations

ADDFOLAward in the Development and Design of Flexible and Open 
Learning
APT&CAdministrative, Professional, Technical and Clerical staff
AUCFAverage Unit of Council Funding
BAILERBritish Association for Information and Library 
Education and Research
BIDSBath ISI Data Service
BLCMPBirmingham Libraries Cooperative Mechanisation Project
CAL, CBLComputer Assisted Learning, Computer Based Learning
CLACopyright Licensing Authority
COPOLCouncil of Polytechnic Librarians
CPDContinuing Professional Development
CVCPCommittee of Vice Chancellors and Principals
DENIDepartment of Education for Northern Ireland
FTEFull Time Equivalent (students or staff)
HCLRGHigher Education Funding Councils' Colleges Learning 
and Resources Group
HEFCEHigher Education Funding Council for England
HRMHuman Resource Management
ILLInter Library Loan
ILSInformation and Library Services
JANETJoint Academic Network
LISLibrary/Information Service
LISULibrary and Information Statistics Unit
NCVQNational Council for Vocational Qualifications
NVQNational Vocational Qualification
OPACOpen Public Access Catalogue
PCEFPolytechnics and Colleges Employers Forum
PESPublic Expenditure Survey
PRPPerformance Related Pay
SCONULStanding Conference of National and University 
Librarians
SCOPStanding Conference of Principals
SCOTVECScottish Vocational Educational Council
TLTPTeaching and Learning Technology Programme
TQMTotal Quality Management
USDUUniversity Staff Development Unit