This is a very interesting contribution by Martyn, and demonstrates very
clearly the way in which libraries (working with other cultural services)
can and do make flexible and quick differences to peoples lives. However
there is one point he makes that I would query, and that is the comparison
with Large shopping centers. Is this really the case that people like them?
They are built for other reasons, economic, commercial, planning (getting
other things, mainly roads built on the back of them), they destroy town
centers, closing specialist shops, local  producers out , as they cannot
afford the high rates of the out of town centers. What evidence is there
that people actually like them? Have you ever observed people in them? They
certainly don't look as if they are enjoying themselves, and it is an
artificial way of life for all concerned.They also reduce choice to a
standard range of goods that you can purchase in the same type of outlet
anywhere. I am sure if given 'choice' Many consumers would opt for more
local, friendly, town and village shopping, of the type we used to enjoy,
and is still available in some 'civilized ' towns, and where the library,
whatever its size can  and is at the heart of it.
Are there any library services in these out of town shopping centers? not
many I guess.

This is an interesting debate with more food for thought, and lots of
potential for research, seminars etc.
Frances
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martyn Wade" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: the future of the main library


> I have been enjoying the debate around "main" libraries.
>
> A few thoughts:
>
>      - A short term view - main libraries are often very successful
because
> people like them.  In the same way many people prefer large shopping
centres to
> smaller ones, many prefer large libraries to smaller ones.  Behind this
lies the
> ongoing tension between acting in market driven way responding to use, and
the
> commitment to inclusion that leads to targeting services that need them
most.
> The answer is usually a pragmatic balance applicable to each authority.
For
> example, in Glasgow there is no "main" lending library, although The
Mitchell
> has this role for information.  This leads to a different service balance
from
> other large cities where there is a "main" lending library as well.
>
>      - I also agree with Penny regarding the future of individual access
to
> information/learning/entertainment.  Whichever way you look at this,
library
> buildings whether small or large, will become less important in direct
service
> delivery.  As customers will be able to increasingly access content in
ways that
> do not require them to visit the library, I suggest that the debate could
be
> broadened to consider the future role of all library buildings.
>
> As another contributor has said, libraries were built to hold collections.
In
> many cases they were even organised to exclude many potential customers.
The
> increasing democratisation of ICT will lead to the democratisation of
content,
> and the need for print based collections will be reduced - although never
> eliminated.  This movement is likely to radically change the role and need
for
> library buildings as the importance of managing the real collections will
be
> reduced as the importance of managing virtual collections increases.
>
> Glasgow has identified the roles of the service as
>
>      Information
>      Education and Lifelong Learning
>      Culture and Leisure
>      Community
>
> None of these take place exclusively within library buildings - indeed
they will
> increasingly take place elsewhere.  For me this leads to a model of shared
> access points covering a wide range of council - and non-council -
services that
> include a "library" function.  This will allow a wider range of access
points
> than the library service could ever support itself, and the opportunity to
> deliver jointly planned and funded services targeted at local need, and
managed
> in a different way.
>
> For example, in August we responded rapidly to the issues in the Sighthill
area
> where - as has been reported nationally - there have been tensions arising
from
> the dispersal programme for asylum seekers and refugees.  This is an area
of
> multiple deprivation, and the council wished to respond to local demands,
> including a request for a drop-in centre.  Within 10 days, Cultural and
Leisure
> Services (led by Libraries, information and Archives) had developed a
community
> education centre, used only for specific organised activities, into a
fully
> refurbished drop-in centre that aimed to provide access to a wide range of
> service.  The centre now additionally includes library, information and
learning
> centre services and activities, but brings together activities developed
and
> delivered by community facilities, community education, youth services and
arts
> development.
>
> Although this building is managed by community facilities, its services
are
> managed jointly, leading to a level of service no individual service could
> achieve.
>
> I know this development is not unique in the UK where a number of
authorities
> have innovative partnership arrangements.  However, the key to their
success is
> that they are not just a library, or a community centre, or whatever.
Joined up
> services are best delivered through joined up buildings.
>
> I suggest we do not need a debate about the relative merits of small and
large
> buildings, but whether we need our own network of buildings at all.
>
> Martyn Wade
>
> Head of Libraries, Information and Archives
> Glasgow City Council
> Cultural and Leisure Services
> 20 Trongate
> Glasgow G1 5ES
>
> tel:   0141 287 5114
> fax:  0141 287 5151
> email:  [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Maguire <[log in to unmask]> at Internet
> Sent: 31 October 2001 13:02
> To: [log in to unmask] at INTERNET
> Subject: RE: the future of the main library
>
>
> I too will happily sign up with Penny to accepting Bruce Myers' offer for
> further debate ... and thanks to Steven for providing the "lemon" & the
> stick in the first place! But I think we're already involved in lemon
groves
> and parts of the whole fruit juice industry debate.
>
> This seems remarkably like the delicious philosophising that took place in
> the 1960s, but then it's time we gave this another good airing ... what
was
> that title ... "The Library in Society" ... or something like that?.
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Maguire
> Group Librarian S & E Devon
> Devon Lifelong Learning
> 01392 384223
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> http://www.devon.gov.uk/library/
> Unless otherwise stated the views expressed are
> personal and not necessarily those of Devon County Council
>
> **************
> PS
>
> Started throwing some thoughts together and also soon realised this is
> unending ... if you read on from here - NOT recommended! - these are just
a
> ragbag of thoughts & ramblings thrown together to sketch out a few
> directions to tease out & pursue further. Must try to concentrate on the
> more foreseeable future ... next 5-10 years or so, beyond that is almost
> anybodies guess, depending what really happens, e.g., with ICT & with
> funding!
>
>
> Fascinating how the debate shifts backwards & forwards between the main
> library, the community library (& why let anyone assume it's a case of
> either very large or very small? ... we've all shapes & sizes on board),
the
> virtual library and so on. Very understandably, we're struggling with our
> notion of what people want & expect from libraries ... or rather what
> "others" with funds & influence might perceive.
>
> What if we tried it from various types of users perspective, the wider
> changes in society and then tracked meeting their needs against the likely
> shifts in library service provision and other changes that are emerging?
> We've come along way already in the last 25 years and can add a good deal
of
> ICT provision experience in the last 5 or so. There is also the
inclination
> to categorise "users" (like books maybe?) when really, the very same
person
> evolves through life (and we have roles to play in support of that) and
> develops great strengths in some directions and weaknesses in others. For
> example, currently, it's quite extraordinary how even very well educated
> individuals can be so "illiterate" & helpless  & lost when it comes to
> personal issues and navigating, for example access to information and
advice
> they deparately need. I guess we can't all know about everything etc.,
etc.
> ... and what about the service issues & roles attached to that?  Do we
need
> to have toolkits/frameworks to audit life stories to identify how people
are
> ennabled to meet their developing needs in their settings both in terms of
> location and what they're about/what stage of life etc. and to identify
gaps
> in provision and overlaps etc. A sort of meeting needs analysis that helps
> us to identify where & how we should be placed in support and what actions
> to take.
>
>
> The longer term wider questions might include ...
>
> - Community Dynamics in rapidly changing times - do "people need people"
at
> community levels ... it might be worth a foray into Scandinavian thinking
on
> this ... some would say provided the library setting is reasonably
> attractive in terms of physical & interpersonal characteristics (nice
> place/nice staff etc.) and quality & breadth of service provision, it's
> going to continue to be a very attractive community facility even if there
> are shifts & variations in the type & range of use. Those who have read
some
> of the detail in user surveys cannot but be heartened by how warm a
welcome
> we provide for our users in a neutral setting available to all ... not
just
> either the less fortunate, or the better off (though quite where you live
> affects the balance of this considerably) . Local Authority members
usually
> speak favourably of library service frontline staff based on the feedback
> they themselves get from the communities they serve.  But the distaff
> argument is indeed how far will virtual facilities meet individual needs
and
> so, for most/many, do away with the need for & relevance of our publibs. -
> at least in the literal/physical sense.
>
> -Change dynamics and change agents ...spot the "pull me-push you" dynamics
> in all this. "External" (e.g. e-government ... for publibs very much as
much
> about emerging information service challenges (e-envoy), e-learning ...
> quite tricky to get into & sustain & say mobile access developments - how
> many publibs are already planning, or indeed have implemented WAP access
to
> their catalogues & request & renewal services? "Semi-internal/sectoral "
> responses (e.g.People's Network & the emerging "Inspiring Learning" &
> "Empowering the Learner").  While developments will vary from service to
> service over time, are we going to be ennabled to & will we seize
> opportunities to develope & innovate in service provision so as to meet
> changing & emerging needs, or will others step in - thankyou! - and we
fade
> away.
>
> - What sort of service mix is likely to be valued in the"future"? But
first,
> what shifts in service provision, not just in publibs but altogether is
> already affecting choices?  So, e.g.INFORMATION SERVICES ... mmmm ... yes,
> look at the drop in staff assisted "real" information enquiries in the
> larger libraries - more & more people are finding their virtual feet
> regarding information provision, not just via www sources, but through
> interest groups & in some cases support groups populated by a wide range
of
> individuals with common interests. And we ourselves as a service area are
> putting up on the www our virtual offerings to users (catalogues/web
> guides/enquiry services etc., etc. You can get an increasing feel for new
> novels through reviews/descriptions in e-seller virtual catalogues, not
hard
> to stitch this across into you local library services virtual request
> service). And we're joining up in local & wider partnership with other
> providers to provide services ... e.g. LIAG for careers & advice on
learning
> opportinities, and, e.g., UfI Learndirect on some structured learning
> provision.  So, community outlet role to allow/facilitate/support/provide
> local participation in service provision driven as national/regional
> initiatives.
>
> - Library services & resources ... as well as exploring future
developments
> and shifts, are we sure that we're not going to pursue a dangerously
> service-centric perspective ... or even worse, a so-called
> "efficiency-driven" perspective on what/which of our services are & will
be
> valued? Take for example the debate about stock ... If you take this to
it's
> illogical conclusion, just run a bunch of smallish-medium sized outlets,
and
> stuff the wider range of material into a warehouse somewhere. That
> straightforward? a large/central library usually contains both popular
> material and more specialised/unusual/less popular
> items. The latter is available for immediate loan and feeds into the
> service/request network. Provided the Large Library is fundamentally
"sound"
> (i.e. reasonable location/ambience/stock & services/staffing) then the
less
> popular & wider range of material gets far greater exposure & use if it
were
> to sit in a warehouse "out of town". Obviously, this doesn't do away with
> the need for stack facilities, but provides a significantly different
> balance. It also provides library staff with opportunity for interaction
> with users within this wider & more specialised set of
> resources/services/staffing and so with feedback and continuously evolving
> knowledge & experience to meet a greater diversity of needs. It also
> provides library users with direct access to a much wider range of
resources
> etc. There has been some work done on the role of Central Libraries ... LA
> Record a year or two or three back ... worth re-identifying & assessing
for
> distinctiveness and etc.
>
>
> - The skills that people as users bring with them - there are different
> strands to this in that youngsters currently passing through education
> stages should/willl "emerge" with a wider variety of ICT based skills that
> at present, many older folk have. How long will we need to support
> individuals ICT capability - currently a significant "fairly recent &
still
> emerging role - probably for quite a few years yet ... communities are
> increasingly supported in these skills developments through an ever
> increasing number of learning opportunities through community learning via
> "evening/day classes" & drop-in facilities ... and publibs have their part
> to play in this (UKonline etc.).
>
> - The skills that we have as staff and are constantly developing/refining
> that others will value & "benefit from" ... not to be dismissed lightly
...
> so - supporting a wide variety of individuals at a point in time with
> whatever they throw at you, information handling, stock knowledge,
> networking to find information & access to other material & human
resources
> to meet user needs, learning support etc. At the same time, as external
> quality standards move ever closer to us being required to adopt them, can
> we really expect smaller service points' staff to take these board (e.g.
IAG
> & trutorial qualifications for learning provision) and will that limit
role
> & service development in itself?
>
> - Library settings ... first of all location - "the library" - smaller
ones
> are found in so many different settings, and these alone influence the
role
> considerably, because to some degree they influence the user base ... e.g.
> urban in contrast to more rural settings in terms of sheer distance &
> community identity  & proximity ... next to shops/post offices/health
> centres, part of dual use school/public arrangements, part of
multi-service
> centres etc. Then there's the scale of the library which inevitably
> influences the diversity of service, resources to hand and more specialist
> staff skills which are available both at the service point where the
sataff
> are located, and throughout the library network, and often to partnerships
> and services we liaise with for mutual support in pursuit of meeting user
> needs. Hmmnn ... we might have to think quite hard about the range of
> characteristics/services a community library should aspire to ... and we
> might find that there is a de-minimis argument where below a certain
> threshold hard economics justifies challenging vfm for a fixed service
point
> (anyone brave enough to start a debate on when (very) small service point,
> when mobile stop etc.?)
>
> - Impact of services - "the library services" - often enormously
influenced
> by the proactive/reactive stance taken in service provision. The proactive
> "library" is enormously intertwined with other activities in the
community,
> sharing other's multiple agendas ... and it doesn't have to be mutually
> exclusive in user terms(the so-called "well off" not& not needing
> participation, the "excluded" being chased by one & all to "ensure"
> participation). For example SERVICES TO CHILDREN, making the assumption
that
> the printed book still has a shelf-life for some time to come, the
> parent/child dynamic is an enormous engine for participation in
> library-based children's activities/services & supporting one's child's
> development and participation ... but you start very much with early years
&
> as part of a wider community early years strategy! And what are you doing
> there as a library service? The answer isn't going to come from just us,
but
> clearly involves "children developing & learning, not only from the books
> they come into contacxt with, but through the very act of going into the
> library & using it & taking part in activities & getting used to asking
> questions etc., etc. And the parents ... the support they get in parenting
> skills from a very early stage (babies need books/bookstart etc.) Then
> there's the whole issue of being empowered (& resourced!!!) to reach out
> into the community and participate in shared developments and agendas
early
> years/sure start/literacy/parenting skills development/family learning
etc.
> So from that quick sample foray into early years provision
>
> -"the library service" - as a network concept ... we need to explore this
> vigorously to make it work & to get it understood. This means visiting
what
> it actually does, how effectively (not just efficiently) and exploring
> potential for development & additionality. e.g. emergeance of ICT based
> information facilities at smaller libraries has the potential to
> transform/invigorate their information role ... but, staff in smaller
> libraries have to cope with a wide range of duties & roles, will they be
> inclined to seize this as an opportunity to go to the ends of the world
> themselves to meet their users information needs, or will they use the
> emerging ICT network to tap into knowledge and skills of staff in the
> Large/Central Library? The impact on their capacity to keep up with
overall
> workload and deal with information enquiries effectively will vary
> considerably depending on what line they take, what overall factors are
> involved, any guidance they receive and indeed on whether or not the
service
> evolves its own internally networked equivalent of "Ask a Librarian"
>
> - Under development! ... SERVICE MIX needs interpreting into SERVICE ROLES
> and vice-versa and the contributions we make to shared & wider objectives
&
> meeting individual & community needs needs some sort of external
perspective
> & valuing. Almost every publibs Annual Library Plan is already full of a
> variety of interpretations of roles and plans/developments/objectives well
> beyond the simplistic but mass markets of borrowing books and providing
> information on demand , either on the shelves/PC or via staff assistance.
>
> Times up!
>
> ***********************
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Penny Garrod [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: 31 October 2001 09:29
> > To:   [log in to unmask]
> > Subject:      the future of the main library
> >
> > Dear Colleagues
> >
> > I haven't enjoyed a mail list debate so much for a long time. I think
this
> > *lemon* is well worth poking with a fairly big stick.  .......
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Disclaimer:
> This message is intended only for use of the addressee. If this message
> was sent to you in error, please notify the sender and delete this
message.
> Glasgow City Council cannot accept responsibility for viruses, so please
> scan attachments. Views expressed in this message do not necessarily
reflect
> those of the Council who will not necessarily be bound by its contents.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--